KevinG Posted October 26, 2015 Posted October 26, 2015 Joking aside, President Kimball was pretty clear in what he meant. Removing that quote from its context misses the whole point. The people who most frequently quote Spencer Kimball's Miracle of Forgiveness passages on fighting for one's chastity are pot stirrers and Bishops over 80 years of age.
jkwilliams Posted October 26, 2015 Posted October 26, 2015 Refusing to allow your chest to be touched. By the EMT who is trying to restart your heart. I know you're trying to be funny, but what was taught is not particularly humorous, at least not to me. I would never tell my daughters that they should fight off a rapist with their lives, lest their virtue be stolen. 3
bluebell Posted October 26, 2015 Posted October 26, 2015 Refusing to allow your chest to be touched. By the EMT who is trying to restart your heart. This one is actually true to life. A father let his daughter drown in Dubai, because having a male life guard touch her would have been sinful. http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/dad-lets-daughter-die-male-rescuers-don-dishonor-article-1.2319799 1
KevinG Posted October 26, 2015 Posted October 26, 2015 I would rather have a sinful child who can repent, than a dead one who never sinned. And thank goodness, since all of my children over the age of 8 are sinful (as we all are). While being a fan of Spencer Kimball, I have also found myself consoling children who are the victims of rape, children who made mistakes, and children who were accused of things because they were chaste. In all three cases I'm glad they are still alive, know Christ, and have His atonement to help them heal. 3
jkwilliams Posted October 26, 2015 Posted October 26, 2015 The people who most frequently quote Spencer Kimball's Miracle of Forgiveness passages on fighting for one's chastity are pot stirrers and Bishops over 80 years of age. I didn't bring it up, but if someone is going to bring it up, it is important to provide the context. I know it was taught to me the way President Kimball taught it, and it just seems strange, first of all to resurrect these quotes and then to say it's an overreaction to point out the context.
jkwilliams Posted October 26, 2015 Posted October 26, 2015 This one is actually true to life. A father let his daughter drown in Dubai, because having a male life guard touch her would have been sinful. http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/dad-lets-daughter-die-male-rescuers-don-dishonor-article-1.2319799 Kind of like those girls in Saudi Arabia who burned to death in a school because the police wouldn't allow them to leave without their headscarves.
KevinG Posted October 26, 2015 Posted October 26, 2015 I know you're trying to be funny, but what was taught is not particularly humorous, at least not to me. I would never tell my daughters that they should fight off a rapist with their lives, lest their virtue be stolen. I'm mocking the thread not rape victims. If someone in this day and age wholeheartedly agrees with the advise to die rather than submit to a rape then avoid them at all cost.
Calm Posted October 26, 2015 Posted October 26, 2015 (edited) Such statements are regarding as appalling by former Mormons (and perhaps active Mormons) or those of other faiths or no faith. Given the fact that there is the possibility for repentance, should one lose their virginity outside the bonds of marriage, does the attitude reflected in the above statements make sense to all or do we regard them as simply personal opinions of the ones who said them? I know what FairMormon says about it but what are the opinions here? Our Father in Heaven allows us to come home to become clean (and we only become unclean in the first place because of our own actions, someone can't be forced to lose their virtue). My personal opinion is that we should do the same and those who don't are wrong and expressing personal opinion. Edited October 26, 2015 by Calm
JAHS Posted October 26, 2015 Author Posted October 26, 2015 Then why bring up quotes that have to do with rape? Here's the context in which those statements were taught to us: So, the quote you gave earlier is made in the context of chastity being "taken or stolen" and the rape victim not cooperating with the rapist. Perhaps you weren't around when these things were being taught, but I sure remember. But presenting the quote out of context is to completely miss the meaning.True for some of them, but for example the quote by President Hinckley I think was refering to him being on his mission:“I know what my mother expects. I know what she’s saying in her prayers. She’d rather have me come home dead than unclean.” (Gordon B. Hinckley, Conference Report, April 1967, pp. 51-55) No rape involved here, but a missionary posibly making the mistake of fornication while on a mission.
SmileyMcGee Posted October 26, 2015 Posted October 26, 2015 (edited) Drowning in a heavy 19th century bathing costume. Heat stroke from wearing three layers of camisoles under a sun dress in hot weather. Closing one's eyes in order to avoid a pornographic ad. On the back of a bus. While it is backing up. Standing firmly and saying "no means no!" To a charging rhino. Refusing to allow your chest to be touched. By the EMT who is trying to restart your heart. Lest we accuse Kevin of making light of a serious issue, I think he is merely pointing out the absurdity of the quotes made by past prophets. It is a very serious issue, and the prophetic quotes are the bad jokes. Edited October 26, 2015 by SmileyMcGee 1
Shadrak Posted October 26, 2015 Posted October 26, 2015 It seems like these quotes about protecting chastity at all costs, including rape, are still taught today. The YW value "Virtue" refers to Moroni 9:9 which indicates that rape by milirary conquest is a way to lose chastity and virtue, "which is most dear and precious above all things." Could it be construed that resistance or willingness is not a factor when it comes to chastity but that chastity is only a physical state to preserve? 1
jkwilliams Posted October 26, 2015 Posted October 26, 2015 True for some of them, but for example the quote by President Hinckley I think was refering to him being on his mission:“I know what my mother expects. I know what she’s saying in her prayers. She’d rather have me come home dead than unclean.” (Gordon B. Hinckley, Conference Report, April 1967, pp. 51-55) No rape involved here, but a missionary posibly making the mistake of fornication while on a mission. Sure, that's a different issue, but you included the rape quote, so it kind of clouded the whole thread. As for the non-rape quotes: would I prefer that my kids have premarital sex or die? I think I'd prefer that they understand that repentance is always possible. 3
KevinG Posted October 26, 2015 Posted October 26, 2015 (edited) Lest we accuse Kevin of making light of a serious issue, I think he is merely pointing out the absurdity of the quotes made by past prophets. It is a serious issue, and the prophetic quotes are the bad jokes. Ding ding ding! We have a winner. The whole idea is ludicrous, outdated, and refuted by the millions of Latter-day Saint victims of rape and abuse who were consoled by grateful parents that they survived. So let's see what the Church teaches today: "Victims of abuse should be assured that they are not to blame for the harmful behavior of others. They do not need to feel guilt. If they have been a victim of rape or other sexual abuse, whether they have been abused by an acquaintance, a stranger, or even a family member, victims of sexual abuse are not guilty of sexual sin." -LDS.org/abuse "I solemnly testify that when another’s acts of violence, perversion, or incest hurt you terribly, against your will, you are not responsible and you must not feel guilty." - Richard G. Scott "The scriptures tell us that virtue is to be cherished, that a virtuous woman is loved of the Lord. And as far back as the Mosaic Law the scriptures discuss the idea that when a woman is the unwilling victim of rape, she is innocent of crime; she is innocent of sin." - Elder Rex D Pinegar I would venture to say the rape = loss of virtue idea has been refuted. On the other hand I have given my children express permission to gouge someone's eyes out or any other clever ways to maim an attacker if they are being raped. Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6. Edited October 26, 2015 by KevinG 2
jkwilliams Posted October 26, 2015 Posted October 26, 2015 Sorry for misreading you, KevinG. I completely agree with you. 1
KevinG Posted October 26, 2015 Posted October 26, 2015 (edited) Sorry for misreading you, KevinG. I completely agree with you. No problem... my sarcasm gets ahead of my brain sometimes and it has to be reined back in. I do wonder sometimes why this topic gets resurrected so much, when there are many more recent statements like the one's I quoted above, that refute the idea that a victim of abuse is somehow responsible for any sin at all. Edited October 26, 2015 by KevinG 1
sethpayne Posted October 26, 2015 Posted October 26, 2015 Not suprisingly I agree with them mostly. Repentance may be possible in many cases, but is difficult and becomes moreso on repeat offenses and under weightier covenants. Just how important is keeping our lives in the grand scheme of things? It's not like anyone gets out of here alive. So which is more important to preserve? Mortal life or virtue? I feel very sorry for your children.
Ares Posted October 26, 2015 Posted October 26, 2015 I feel very sorry for your children. No personal remarks.
sethpayne Posted October 26, 2015 Posted October 26, 2015 (edited) No personal remarks. Ok. I'll revise. I feel bad for the children of anyone who holds to such archaic, unChristian, and abhorrent views. Congratulations on your thread ban. Edited October 26, 2015 by Ares
Calm Posted October 26, 2015 Posted October 26, 2015 The scriptures tell us that virtue is to be cherished, that a virtuous woman is loved of the Lord. And as far back as the Mosaic Law the scriptures discuss the idea that when a woman is the unwilling victim of rape, she is innocent of crime; she is innocent of sin." - Elder Rex D Pinegar Unfortunately this is not determined in the OT by whether or not she wants to be raped, but whether or not she fights enough to be noticed if she is in a city...she is given the benefit of the doubt if no one is likely within calling range. While she doesn't have to fight until death (suggesting one can indeed fight until death is false because one can be overpowered and not able to move at all and the only way to die is to commit suicide once released...which is not taught as an option) as is suggested in one of the quotes here, innocence is not assumed to be the same as it is today by the Church. 3
Garden Girl Posted October 26, 2015 Posted October 26, 2015 Joking aside, President Kimball was pretty clear in what he meant. Removing that quote from its context misses the whole point. I think it was discussed previously in a thread here on similar topic that Pres Kimball's son has said that Pres Kimball later regretted some of the things he wrote in TMoF as being too strong... Being unfamiliar with what the son was talking about, I'm not sure what all was being referred to by the son...I adhere to the quotes posted by KevinG in his post #38 as being the correct stance.. GG
jkwilliams Posted October 26, 2015 Posted October 26, 2015 I think it was discussed previously in a thread here on similar topic that Pres Kimball's son has said that Pres Kimball later regretted some of the things he wrote in TMoF as being too strong... Being unfamiliar with what the son was talking about, I'm not sure what all was being referred to by the son...I adhere to the quotes posted by KevinG in his post #38 as being the correct stance.. GG Same here. I just was surprised to see those old teachings resurrected and spoken of approvingly. 1
Guest Posted October 26, 2015 Posted October 26, 2015 To the OP:Comments such as these are made to put emphasis on the importance to remaining chase before and after marriage. They all of course made by men who would indeed fight to the death to keep someone from violating them, they do not understand how young girls or women would be gripped in fear and unable to fight (which btw many men might to the same). Having said that, there is no sin in being attacked by someone stronger, be it in strength and weaponry. There is also repentance for those who give their virtue without fear of harm, but fear of peer pressure. Any who do so, who seek the blessing of Temple marriage (although having repenting) wish they had been stronger in will and faith. But our faith and most on the earth have, or have spoken in harsh terms such as these may seem as they put a high value of living chase lives. Sadly many put a much higher premium of the virtue of girls, than boys...almost every book of scripture does as well. No matter the circumstances, far greater punishment awaits the parents and leaders who will not forgive, than those who are trying to repent. Any parent or ecclesiastical leader who is not always standing ready and joyful as the father of the prodigal son, will face the wrath and judgement of a God is is always willing and eger to recieve all who wish to repent and come back into the fold. It is so easy to go "quote mining" to pass judgement upon leaders of the past, than to look to our leaders today and God, that we pass judgement upon the young...looking with "soft eyes", and the understanding that youth does not come with the wisdom of age and make mistakes. Sometimes (and often times) very serious mistakes, made worse by those unwilling to forgive and forget. As I grow older and my eyes have dimmed enough, I m able to see more a path to forgive and I am forced to see all things with soft eyes and soft edges. I feel it a great blessing that age (and I pray wisdom) have allowed me to see more clearly and be more forgiving. I am trying to see more softly and be ever forgiving, as this is how I hope that my God sees me...I am quick not to judge harshly single quotes and instead look at the the whole of a man's life and quick to forgive. Then there my be hope that God and others can do the same for me. I have been judged harshly by comments and lost friends...because they could not see there way clear to see me as a whole or forgive, here and in other places as well. I however hold no ill will, as again I too want to be forgiven.
JAHS Posted October 26, 2015 Author Posted October 26, 2015 Hre's something a little more recent that Elder Scott said: "The victim must do all in his or her power to stop the abuse. Most often, the victim is innocent because of being disabled by fear or the power or authority of the offender. At some point in time, however, the Lord may prompt a victim to recognize a degree of responsibility for abuse. Your priesthood leader will help assess your responsibility so that, if needed, it can be addressed. Otherwise the seeds of guilt will remain and sprout into bitter fruit. Yet no matter what degree of responsibility, from absolutely none to increasing consent, the healing power of the atonement of Jesus Christ can provide a complete cure."- Apostle Richard G. Scott "Healing the Tragic Scars of Abuse," General Conference, Ensign, May 1992 3
Gray Posted October 26, 2015 Posted October 26, 2015 (edited) Hre's something a little more recent that Elder Scott said: "The victim must do all in his or her power to stop the abuse. Most often, the victim is innocent because of being disabled by fear or the power or authority of the offender. At some point in time, however, the Lord may prompt a victim to recognize a degree of responsibility for abuse. Your priesthood leader will help assess your responsibility so that, if needed, it can be addressed. Otherwise the seeds of guilt will remain and sprout into bitter fruit. Yet no matter what degree of responsibility, from absolutely none to increasing consent, the healing power of the atonement of Jesus Christ can provide a complete cure."- Apostle Richard G. Scott "Healing the Tragic Scars of Abuse," General Conference, Ensign, May 1992 Unfortunately many victims feel guilt after being abused. So this again is a rather counter-productive and unfortunate teaching. I don't think any good psychologist would recommend this approach. But of course Elder Scott was not an expert on dealing with victims of abuse (neither am I). Edited October 26, 2015 by Gray 1
KevinG Posted October 26, 2015 Posted October 26, 2015 Hre's something a little more recent that Elder Scott said: "The victim must do all in his or her power to stop the abuse. Most often, the victim is innocent because of being disabled by fear or the power or authority of the offender. At some point in time, however, the Lord may prompt a victim to recognize a degree of responsibility for abuse. Your priesthood leader will help assess your responsibility so that, if needed, it can be addressed. Otherwise the seeds of guilt will remain and sprout into bitter fruit. Yet no matter what degree of responsibility, from absolutely none to increasing consent, the healing power of the atonement of Jesus Christ can provide a complete cure."- Apostle Richard G. Scott "Healing the Tragic Scars of Abuse," General Conference, Ensign, May 1992 Many situations are very complex. A victim who crossed a line voluntarily, but was coerced to go further than they had intended. I have first hand knowledge of situations like that and have counselled victims accordingly. For example: "Just because you went further than you should have, or placed yourself in a risky situation, doesn't mean you deserved to be victimized." Elder Scott is not advocating that victimization includes guilt. He is saying that if someone feels guilt or partial responsibility then they can be forgiven as well as the person who had no guilt, or much guilt.
Recommended Posts