Girls raised in the Church

[Five Solas]

19 hours ago, bcuzbcuz said:

...

I lost my virginity. My chastity I regained the next day.

Dunno if there's a "greatest posts" page somewhere on the forum.  But if so, this at least deserves consideration...

;0)

--Erik

PS.  But maybe it's just because I'm a fan of the late David Bowie

[Five Solas]

In all seriousness, when are LDS parents going to stop making their teenage daughters sit alone behind a closed door with an adult male who asks questions about her chastity/sexuality and demands answers?  And what do these parents imagine the lesson is for their "girls raised in the church?" 

Is there another answer to be had, apart from rank submission?

--Erik

PS.  I ask as a father of two daughters...

[Meadowchik]

47 minutes ago, Five Solas said:

In all seriousness, when are LDS parents going to stop making their teenage daughters sit alone behind a closed door with an adult male who asks questions about her chastity/sexuality and demands answers?  And what do these parents imagine the lesson is for their "girls raised in the church?" 

Is there another answer to be had, apart from rank submission?

--Erik

PS.  I ask as a father of two daughters...

Why would ANYone submit to a worthiness interview?

[Meadowchik]

"My" definitions:

Virginity: ...not a moral standard in the Church in and of itself.

Chastity: the quality and state of sexual purity in personal thought and action.

Virtue: valued power to act, and in frequent LDS contexts, the power of acting within a state of chastity.

When one lives a virtuous life, they exercise that valued power themselves for good.

So when a person is a victim, they can be in a state of chastity, even when losing their virginity outside of marriage. But if they have no agency, their virtue is not recognised and can even be rejected and trampled.

No one can ever take away another's chastity, even if their virginity and virtue--ability to exercise that power freely--are taken from them.

To me, these three terms are related but certainly not the same.

The gospel recognizes and supports a world of agency, where not only chastity is chosen but where virtue is possible, each individual personally acting as agents of their own lives and freely making their own choices.

Virtue is more a sign of an enlightened community allowing individual liberty to choose the right.

 

Edited September 8, 2016 by Meadowchik

[Bobbieaware]

9 hours ago, Calm said:

I don't know who here is arguing for sexual immorality, so can you please dispense with the off topic lectures as if anyone here needs to be convinced of the harm, sometimes extreme harm that can come from sexual immorality.  I am going to ignore those parts of your posts (and have been ignoring them mostly).

It is when you make comments like this that I have to wonder if you actually read people's posts.  I have done more than just a general search on "most dear and precious" and have posted some of my results in this very thread.  Perhaps if you read my posts closer you would understand that.  I have looked at each one of the usages of "most dear and precious" (how else would I know how the phrase was being used), many multiples times by now, along with "most precious possession" and quite a bit on chastity without any reference to Moroni. though that last is irrelevant to the argument I am making, but I was curious to see what directions and methods were and are being used to teach chastity for another project.  That is how I can tell only two of those who use the phrase "most dear and precious" used it in the way that Mormon did (at least in the sense that others can deprive victims of chastity and virtue) and that was to explain that victims were not guilty for this type of chastity loss/deprivation and were not required to repent of anything.  Others who were using the phrase were teaching chastity as an active, moral choice that might be influenced by others, but never made for us out of our control as happened to the women in Moroni.

According to google, there are only 24 non repeated/too similar to count hits of "most dear and precious" on lds.org so it is not a monumental, lifetime task to get through them.  And if you want to be sure like I did, you can ask google to put up all the results and spend time confirming they are pretty close on target.  I encourage anyone interested in the subject to search the phrase with a site:lds.org qualifier and read the articles that come up.

As to your understanding, I recognized the generic application by you of the phrase from the beginning and that is what I have been responding to in your posts, to demonstrate how this generic application is inconsistent in various ways with how the scriptures (how Mormon describes chastity) and most other leaders view things (their minds go to other things besides chastity and virtue when teaching of what is most precious to us). I think I have shown multiple times that while there are many, including leaders, who use the "most dear and precious" phrase in the generic way (it is, after all, a beautiful and highly persuasive phrase; it is understandable why it appears to be a favorite of some leaders), it does not actually make sense to use it in that way as what Mormon is describing is the result of horrific treatment in the midst of war, trauma imposed on women, not the result of our moral agency and attempts at living God's commandments and the Gospel.

I am not in the least now or before addressing what chastity is in "Mormonism".  I am addressing what chastity is in the book of Moroni, specifically chapter 9.  I am, btw, quite familiar with the general topic having been listening to teachings for the past 50+ years and I don't really need that explained to me and I highly doubt anyone else here posting does either from what is discussed even if some don't agree with it or believe in time the definition may change...though perhaps there are uninformed lurkers and if so I encourage them to go read about it on lds.org rather than depending on anyone here to explain things.  I have always been in this thread addressing the use of the Moroni verse to teach the general principle of chastity and virtue and attempting to make the point of why this does not work.  You keep going off on what are to me irrelevant topics in your responses to me, imo, and I am really not interested in wasting my time on that anymore.  If you feel the need, please do so in other posts where you don't quote me so I don't have to read them to get to where you actually deal with something I've said if you happen to do so (there have been posts of yours that quote me that have had nothing to do with what I've said imo).   

I recognize I have no authority to interpret scripture for the Church.  If one of our prophets (as I recognize apostles to be) were to come and sit down with me and listen to my explanation of what I believe Mormon is saying based on what I read in his letter and know of biblical cultures (and I do assume that many of the cultural gender standards are consistent with the BoM as well as many other past cultures have been and even some now in some ways) and then he informed I was wrong because he knew that Mormon meant a spiritual form of chastity and thus our spiritual purity state can after all be unwillingly controlled and stolen away from us by others without our consent (which I personally find a horrible false doctrine  that denies moral agency and contradicts other teachings the same leaders are saying, which is why I find it so unlikely that they are actually linking their thought to the actual context as opposed to thinking of the phrase in isolation), I will certainly bow out of the conversation and no more try to point out the current disconnect I perceive between how Mormon spoke of chastity and how our leaders are teaching it, even though they are using the same set of words "most dear and precious" to describe what they are both saying...or perhaps he might even be able to persuade me that Mormon did not mean that chastity was stolen when he lamented the women's deprivation, but given the limited information the letter provides, I see no reason why anyone would attempt to do that unless perhaps they had a conversation with Mormon himself to clear things up, which I don't rule out and actually expect it to happen sometime in the future.  At this point though, I have found nowhere where a prophet has expounded on the point I am making so as far as I can tell it has not been addressed so I have not received any indirect or direct correction on my thoughts.  And so I will continue to express them here.

I am perfectly willing to receive further light from someone whose calling is to give doctrinal interpretation to scripture, but I see no reason to accept it from anyone else unless the Spirit tells me too.

I do read your posts, but even after reading them I find it difficult to understand what you're really trying yo say. Your points seem to be arcane and unnecessarily complex for a subject that's so simple straightforward and easy to understand. Perhaps you have a greater intellectual capacity to,perceive and express nuance and subtlety than I do. And in saying this I'm not at all being sarcastic. As for me, I like to keep things simple (this is why I've said in the past in discussions and debates I like to take things one specific point at a time). And in that simplicity -- or plainness, as Nephi might say -- I find this whole thing to be llittle more than a tempest of controversy in a tea pot. So I will be simple and plain.

The reason why leaders of the Church have used Moroni 9:9 when highlighting the importance of chastity and virtue is because it is ONE OF THE ONLY VERSES IN ALL OF HOLY WRIT that explains WHY chastity and virtue are important (in this case the reason why chastity and virtue are said to be important is because they are "most dear and precious above all things"). Except for the one instance where Jacob says the Lord "delights in the chastity of women," most everywhere else in the scriptures we are simply told that sex outside of marriage is wrong, period, with no attempt to explain why. So it makes perfect sense the leaders of the Church would want to utilize one of only verses in all of scripture that, in spite of the peripheral issue of rape, actually expresses the immense value that chastity and virtue have within the divine scheme of things. The leaders have also used this verse because it is one of very few verses that attempts to explain why chastity and virtue are so important. What other verses of scripture would you want used instead of Moroni 9:9 to help young people understand what the value of chastity and virtue have in the eyes of the Lord? I have an open mind and am willing to be instructed.

Finally, it has always been perfectly obvious to me that in Moroni 9:9 Mormon is not at all conveying the idea that chaste and virtuous victims of rape are -- in spite of their innocence, chastity and virtue -- somehow morally stained or culpable for that rape. Mormon's words are simply his way of saying that chaste and virtuous women were sexually violated and victimized, nothing more. In light of everything else Mormon wrote throughout the Book of Mormom, I'm my opinion, one has to be either ignorant, unintelligent or willfully blind to imagine the prophet was conveying the idea that chaste and virtuous rape victims are morally stained and responsible for something that happened in total violation of their wills and desires. In this instance the application of  a little common sense goes a long way.because Mormon is only conveying the idea that rape victims are physically and emotionally traumatized by rape but they most certainly don't have to repent of something for which they wanted no part. Anybody who knows the just, true and holy prophet Mormon knows he would never be guilty of this kind of unjust, unfair and ungodly thinking. And if God ever thought that way, he would cease to be God.

Edited to add:

When we're resurrected and some members of the Church have the opportunity to ask Mormon why he said innocent chaste and virtuous victims of rape were no longer innocent, chaste and virtuous, what do you think he will say?

Edited September 8, 2016 by Bobbieaware

[stemelbow]

17 hours ago, Calm said:

Stem, your thread but I find it rather off topic unless I am missing some connection.  Are you suggesting girls (those you reference in the opening post) may be in situations that God will inspire them to have sex?

We're talking about girls being raised in the Church and one main issue we've outlined here is that girls who have sex before marriage often feel excessively guilty.  It's kind of ironic to think serious sexual sin is a term used to describe or allude to such behavior, when if we had a different frame of reference there is probably cases in our history wherein serious sexual sin seems to fit nicely with what some might call commands from God.  For me it really throws the black and white thinking and the "she or he is crossing a line with that sexual sin" into question. 

[stemelbow]

16 hours ago, Sleeper Cell said:

Perhaps someone whom God has authorized to make such a statement.

But the one whom God has authorized is authorized in his own mind.  Perhaps polygamy never should have been. 

[Rain]

Ok then let's make this simple. I don't recall Moroni 9:9 being a scripture that stood out till I read it as I was working on Personal Progress alongside my daughter. It is among a list of scriptures and readings about virtue and chastity. 

Simply put, Moroni 9:9, among the other readings, is glaringly out of context. It is about rape. The other readings are about making and keeping onself virtuous.  

My husband said last night it is as if someone did a search for virtue and stuck it in there without reading what it was actually talking about.

Edited September 8, 2016 by Rain

[Bobbieaware]

1 hour ago, Rain said:

Ok then let's make this simple. I don't recall Moroni 9:9 being a scripture that stood out till I read it as I was working on Personal Progress alongside my daughter. It is among a list of scriptures and readings about virtue and chastity. 

Simply put, Moroni 9:9, among the other readings, is glaringly out of context. It is about rape. The other readings are about making and keeping onself virtuous.  

My husband said last night it is as if someone did a search for virtue and stuck it in there without reading what it was actually talking about.

You've made it complicated. The eternal verity that chastity and virtue are "most dear and precious above all" stands nobly on its own and needs not have anything to do with rape. Again, it is an eternal principle of truth that stands on its own. The fact that Mormon mentioned this glorious eternal verity in connection with rape is purely incidental. And this is why leaders of the Church have used and glorified this eternal principle without stressing that Mormon used it explain why rape is so overwhelmingly heinous.

Edited September 8, 2016 by Bobbieaware

[Tacenda]

A couple of quotes from this talk...http://scriptures.byu.edu/gettalk.php?ID=1540

"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."

"In this day when modesty is thrust into the background, and chastity is considered an outmoded virtue, I appeal to parents especially, and to my fellow teachers, both in and out of the Church, to teach youth to keep their souls unmarred and unsullied from this and other debasing sins, the consequences of which will smite and haunt them intimately until their conscience is seared and their character becomes sordid. A chaste, not a profligate, life is the source of virile manhood. The test of true womanhood comes when the woman stands innocent at the court of chastity. All qualities are crowned by this most precious virtue of beautiful womanhood. It is the most vital part of the foundation of a happy married life, and is the source of strength and perpetuity of the race."

[Jeanne]

12 hours ago, Avatar4321 said:

I must have missed the priesthood lesson where we were told that it's all the girls responsibility to stop us from violating the law of chastity.

Not your fault.  I don't think the young men have a clue what the girls are being taught.  And of course..some of the girls are not aware that young men are being taught their responsibility either...but the thread is about young girls.

[Avatar4321]

9 hours ago, Five Solas said:

In all seriousness, when are LDS parents going to stop making their teenage daughters sit alone behind a closed door with an adult male who asks questions about her chastity/sexuality and demands answers?  And what do these parents imagine the lesson is for their "girls raised in the church?" 

Is there another answer to be had, apart from rank submission?

--Erik

PS.  I ask as a father of two daughters...

That they are accountable for their choices

[Avatar4321]

7 minutes ago, Jeanne said:

Not your fault.  I don't think the young men have a clue what the girls are being taught.  And of course..some of the girls are not aware that young men are being taught their responsibility either...but the thread is about young girls.

I've been in countless chastity lessons. Most were in fact, coed. And they involved lessons from an Apostle teaching the exact opposite of what you were complaining about

[Jeanne]

1 minute ago, Avatar4321 said:

I've been in countless chastity lessons. Most were in fact, coed. And they involved lessons from an Apostle teaching the exact opposite of what you were complaining about

Perhaps we were brought up in a different time...I am..soooo old!!  I am not complaining..I stated a fact in my own life of what I was taught.  I don't remember coed discussions other than briefly in seminary. 

[Bobbieaware]

1 hour ago, Rain said:

Ok then let's make this simple. I don't recall Moroni 9:9 being a scripture that stood out till I read it as I was working on Personal Progress alongside my daughter. It is among a list of scriptures and readings about virtue and chastity. 

Simply put, Moroni 9:9, among the other readings, is glaringly out of context. It is about rape. The other readings are about making and keeping onself virtuous.  

My husband said last night it is as if someone did a search for virtue and stuck it in there without reading what it was actually talking about.

Let's suppose a 40 year-old woman manages to live a fully chaste and virtuous life for the entire span of her 40 years on earth, but then in beginning of her 41st year she is raped. What on earth does her being raped in her 41st year have anything to do with the fact that for over 40 years she was obedient to the Lord and lived a chaste and virtuous life? Did she only decide to live that chaste and virtuous life in anticipation of the fact that somehow she knew one day she would be raped?

What is so difficult to understand about that fact that a woman doesn't have to be raped in order for it to be said that she lived a chaste and virtuous life? And if the Lamanite women mentioned in Moroni 9:9 lived chaste and virtuous for many years prior to being raped, tortured, murdered and devoured by the wicked Nephites, what does the fact that they were victimized in these horrific ways have anything to do with their years of chastity and virtue prior to being raped? Does the fact that they were tortured invalidate that fact that prior to being tortured they were chaste and virtuous? Does the fact that they were murdered invalidate the fact that prior to being murdered they were chaste and virtuous? Does the fact that they were devoured invalidate the fact that prior to being devoured they were chaste and virtuous? Of course not!

For the life of me, I don't understand why some here can't comprehend the fact the sacred principles of chastity and virtue stand independently on their own without having to be associated in some way with sexual abuse. If Mormon had simply said faith and virtue are most dear and precious above all, without using these sacred principles to underscore the heinous and supremely unjust nature of rape, I doubt many here would have a problem with it. But because Mormon said it was a terrible thing that chaste and virtuous women were raped, tortured and murdered, somehow we can't mention that Mormon also said chastity and virtue are most dear and precious above all. I don't get it.

[Danzo]

1 hour ago, Jeanne said:

Perhaps we were brought up in a different time...I am..soooo old!!  I am not complaining..I stated a fact in my own life of what I was taught.  I don't remember coed discussions other than briefly in seminary. 

perhaps your experience unique and not representative of the entire church.

[Jeanne]

1 hour ago, Danzo said:

perhaps your experience unique and not representative of the entire church.

I would not know that.  I just know my own county..and life experience.  I am surprised at those who did not have these experiences..and envy them.  I believe the church is moving in a better direction in this area which I have found out on this thread. I think it is great.  One can be taught the very importance of chastity with a better stress of the atonement and the cleansing of sins through that.  I am not sure that has always been clear.  In any case..if the object lessons are gone, I am a happy camper..no one should want to die to be clean but guided by good conscience and forgiveness. 

[Danzo]

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

A couple of quotes from this talk...http://scriptures.byu.edu/gettalk.php?ID=1540

"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."

 

Thank you for pointing out that there is no double standard in the church.  If anything, the law of chastity is more severely taught to the men than the women.

Other than that, thank you for pointing me to this excellent talk.

 

[Danzo]

5 minutes ago, Jeanne said:

I am a happy camper..no one should want to die to be clean but guided by good conscience and forgiveness. 

Instead of teach people to avoid sin, maybe we should just say  "Eat, drink, and be merry; nevertheless, fear God—he will justify in committing a little sin; yea, lie a little, take the advantage of one because of his words, dig a pit for thy neighbor; there is no harm in this; and do all these things, for tomorrow we die; and if it so be that we are guilty, God will beat us with a few stripes, and at last we shall be saved in the kingdom of God."

[Jeanne]

7 minutes ago, Danzo said:

Instead of teach people to avoid sin, maybe we should just say  "Eat, drink, and be merry; nevertheless, fear God—he will justify in committing a little sin; yea, lie a little, take the advantage of one because of his words, dig a pit for thy neighbor; there is no harm in this; and do all these things, for tomorrow we die; and if it so be that we are guilty, God will beat us with a few stripes, and at last we shall be saved in the kingdom of God."

No...good doctrine is universal.  Where there is harm ..let it be said and learn..I don't think anything like that at all.  I am all for teaching good things.  But if one repents, there is no need for a few stripes more..just be done with it and move on.  No one..NO ONE is perfect.

[Eek!]

3 hours ago, Bobbieaware said:

Let's suppose a 40 year-old woman manages to live a fully chaste and virtuous life for the entire span of her 40 years on earth, but then in beginning of her 41st year she is raped. 

In your hypothetical, do you believe that the woman is still chaste and virtuous after she was raped?  

For the record, I do.  

Imo Mormon's wording was poorly chosen.  It happens. 

Edited September 8, 2016 by Eek!

[Calm]

6 hours ago, Rain said:

Ok then let's make this simple. I don't recall Moroni 9:9 being a scripture that stood out till I read it as I was working on Personal Progress alongside my daughter. It is among a list of scriptures and readings about virtue and chastity. 

Simply put, Moroni 9:9, among the other readings, is glaringly out of context. It is about rape. The other readings are about making and keeping onself virtuous.  

My husband said last night it is as if someone did a search for virtue and stuck it in there without reading what it was actually talking about.

Ding, ding, ding...winner

[Rain]

5 hours ago, Bobbieaware said:

Let's suppose a 40 year-old woman manages to live a fully chaste and virtuous life for the entire span of her 40 years on earth, but then in beginning of her 41st year she is raped. What on earth does her being raped in her 41st year have anything to do with the fact that for over 40 years she was obedient to the Lord and lived a chaste and virtuous life? Did she only decide to live that chaste and virtuous life in anticipation of the fact that somehow she knew one day she would be raped?

What is so difficult to understand about that fact that a woman doesn't have to be raped in order for it to be said that she lived a chaste and virtuous life? And if the Lamanite women mentioned in Moroni 9:9 lived chaste and virtuous for many years prior to being raped, tortured, murdered and devoured by the wicked Nephites, what does the fact that they were victimized in these horrific ways have anything to do with their years of chastity and virtue prior to being raped? Does the fact that they were tortured invalidate that fact that prior to being tortured they were chaste and virtuous? Does the fact that they were murdered invalidate the fact that prior to being murdered they were chaste and virtuous? Does the fact that they were devoured invalidate the fact that prior to being devoured they were chaste and virtuous? Of course not!

For the life of me, I don't understand why some here can't comprehend the fact the sacred principles of chastity and virtue stand independently on their own without having to be associated in some way with sexual abuse. If Mormon had simply said faith and virtue are most dear and precious above all, without using these sacred principles to underscore the heinous and supremely unjust nature of rape, I doubt many here would have a problem with it. But because Mormon said it was a terrible thing that chaste and virtuous women were raped, tortured and murdered, somehow we can't mention that Mormon also said chastity and virtue are most dear and precious above all. I don't get it.

 

What I highlighted in red is ironic to me. Chastity and virtue DO stand independently on their own and SHOULD not be associated with abuse.  THAT is why a scripture passage about war, rape, murder and cannibalism is out of context in a booklet (Personal Progress) teaching young women to be virtuous.      

[Meadowchik]

1 hour ago, Eek! said:

In your hypothetical, do you believe that the woman is still chaste and virtuous after she was raped?  

For the record, I do.  

Imo Mormon's wording was poorly chosen.  It happens. 

I think she was chaste but that, as a victim, something was taken. Jesus spoke of virtue leaving him, power. 

Virtue/power can be taken from the innocent and pure. It was received by the faithful woman with an issue of blood, who touched Christ's hem, but virtue/agency/power was viciously stolen from women by rapists in Mormon's account.

Is it possible that insisting so much on what the innocence of victims implies, even with good intentions, that the likelihood of such crime being whitewashed away is increased? I do think that doing so chips away at that, at minimum, because, how can they be victims if they lost nothing? They lost agency, among other things, albeit still chaste. Virtue was taken from them.

I would posit that Mormon's account may be among the most femininist passages in the BOM. We're talking about what seems a highly patriarchal culture acknowledging the supreme importance of a woman's agency...If my hypothesis about this use of "virtue" is correct.

Edited September 8, 2016 by Meadowchik

[bcuzbcuz]

6 hours ago, Tacenda said:

A couple of quotes from this talk...http://scriptures.byu.edu/gettalk.php?ID=1540

"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."

"In this day when modesty is thrust into the background, and chastity is considered an outmoded virtue, I appeal to parents especially, and to my fellow teachers, both in and out of the Church, to teach youth to keep their souls unmarred and unsullied from this and other debasing sins, the consequences of which will smite and haunt them intimately until their conscience is seared and their character becomes sordid. A chaste, not a profligate, life is the source of virile manhood. The test of true womanhood comes when the woman stands innocent at the court of chastity. All qualities are crowned by this most precious virtue of beautiful womanhood. It is the most vital part of the foundation of a happy married life, and is the source of strength and perpetuity of the race."

Sorry, but that first quote is nonsense. Anyone who has lost a son or daughter knows that such a starement is made in ignorance. My son or daughter will be welcomed home even if they have lost their virginity, and that is regardless of the events surrounding it. 

My son died 10 years ago. The pain does not go over, it does not go away. A son or daughter can be unclean. That can be cleaned up. Dead? There is no cleaning up or coming back. 

Anyone who wishes their child dead rather than unclean is heartless or ridiculously uninformed or ignorant.