Subject:

Subject:	Anyone hear the ‘Prophet’ tell the men that their wives are their most valuable possession? If I told my wife that it would be the last time. [Comment on Gordon B. Hinckley speaking as a prophet at the April General Conference 2007]
Date:	Apr 02, 2007

Subject:	Here is a snippet from my local paper
Date:	Apr 02 15:51
Author:	Dagny

The Post Register in Idaho Falls (sorry, it's online subscription requiring a log on).

Here is the pertinent quote:

"Husbands, love and treasure your wives. They are your most precious possessions. Wives, encourage and pray for your husbands. They need all the help they can get," president Gordon B. Hinckley said. "Parents, treat your children with great kindness. They are the coming generation who will bring honor to your name….

Hinckley is the 15th president of the church and has served in its top leadership circle for 49 years, at times acting as the de facto president when his predecessors took ill. He ascended to the presidency in 1995. Members revere the leader of the church as a prophet of God.” End quote

Subject:	My sister sent me the quote
Date:	Apr 03 23:34
Author:	Chris

that was published in her newspaper in Montana. The paper had about 3 short paragraphs about the April Conference, and the wife being a possession bit was what they chose to quote in a vastly non-Mormon community.

My sister was fit to be tied at that quote, and ripped off a string of expletives in her email that even made me blush.

Subject:	Yeah, that irritated me when I read it in the paper . . .
Date:	Apr 04 02:27
Author:	imaworkinonit

Women get to be valued possessions, but the men need actual support.

To be honest, sometimes I don't think they really think about what they are saying. They just spout off old clichés and if it sounds okay to their antiquated ears, then it's good to go.

Subject:	Re: Anyone hear Gordo tell the men their wives are their most valuable possession? If I told my wife that it would be the last time. n/t
Date:	Apr 04 14:47

"I think no more of taking another wife than I do of buying a cow." - Heber C. Kimball

Early Mormon apostle speaking on polygamy.

Subject:

Must be! They're cooks, nurses, sex toys, maids. Can you imagine men without all that?? .

Subject:

The ideal woman is a lady in public, a nurse at home, and a whore in bed.

Subject:	It was a creepy old fashioned quote to people on the outside...
Date:	Apr 02 15:56
Author:	Dagny

Women are possessions.

Men are to be supported, along with a joke about how hard they have it.
Children are about extending YOUR name and honor.

Can you imagine him saying men are possessions? Children are NOT about YOU.

Subject:	The "old fashioned" reminded me of a remark of Rudolf Steiner
Date:	Apr 02 16:08
Author:	Richard Foxe

who had a keen sense of history. Commenting on the typical question of "Who from the past would you most like to meet and talk with?" (and people usually mentioning some historical figure), he said that actually even spending a few minutes in conversation with a person from a past era would give one a queasy feeling of dissonance, since the basic presumptions about reality and all the consequent ways of framing thoughts would be so alien. Far more than they realize, people's conceptions and expressions are by-products of their ages. Look at it as a multi-generation gap.

Subject:

That's the problem. By the time these geezers make profit, they are running TSCC from a perspective of a 1/2 century ago.

Subject:	This is rather "dynastic" in tone
Date:	Apr 04 08:28
Author:	not inside the bubble

But, this seems typical, too, in Mo-ism.

P.S: I still don't see why Mormondumb would be so dynastic (dynasty-oriented), in the face of the teaching that babies come to Earth for a body, instead of being created--both body and soul--by their parents, as is the belief in other Christian sects!

In fact, I much PREFER Mormon doctrine, on this point: those other so-called Christian denominations don't have any kind of idea that mankind was not altogether created, right here, in Earth.
And, with that idea, they can truly think of themselves as some kind of "heads of dynasties" (simply for breeding like rabbits!).

So, I don't know how dumb-ass Mormons can take an enlightened idea and turn *it* into dynastic thinking, too: just like those jackass sectarians do.
(but, for different reasons, though).

For the life of me, if God is the Father of each person who comes into the world, then there can be no place for children (or wives) as *possessions* !!…

Subject:	Interesting point about institutional misunderstandings
Date:	Apr 04 15:39
Author:	RF

Some have said that the whole Mormon church is based on misunderstandings of and expropriations from Joseph Smith (much the same as those who claim the disciples really didn't understand Jesus and consequently created "Christianity"). But there is also the contention that JS didn't understand the significance of his own revelations, and so interpreted "new age" insights in "old age" (Old Testament) terms. A case in point was the notions of polygamy and sealing. These may have actually been foreshadowings of post-individualistic "group" consciousness, where people realize they are not really separate from each other and who do join in some transpersonal ideal. But it got "translated" crudely into a physical sexual/dynastic/possessive enterprise, with people grasping a familiar form but missing the new spirit. (By the way, this is the position of ex-communicated mormon occultist JJ (Joseph John) Dewey.)

Subject:	I thought his advice about children was also pretty medieval.
Date:	Apr 04 16:41
Author:	Bro.R.H.

Dagny wrote:
> The Post Register in Idaho Falls

> "Parents, treat your children with great kindness. They are the coming generation who will bring honor to your name."

Is that the best reason he could come up with to "treat your children with great kindness?" Seems like kind of a self-centered reason if you ask me. How about, "Treat your children with great kindness because they're your children and how you treat them will have a tremendous effect on their future"?

Subject:	Re: Amen! For once I agree with Gordo!
Date:	Apr 02 16:14
Author:	Quinlansolo

I tell my wife every other day, "I own your ass!".

Subject:	I would not have believed if I hadn't read it. Mormons believe that women are men's most precious POSSESSIONS?????
Date:	Apr 03 23:58
Author:	SusieQ#1

Where is that taught? Is GBH just talking like a very old man and not a prophet? Where does it say in any Mormon scripture that women are men's POSSESSIONS????

Men own women? That is what Mormonism teaches?

Did I live it for over 30 years and miss that?

UNBELIEVABLE!

Subject:	Re: Anyone hear Gordo tell the men their wives are their most valuable possession? If I told my wife that it would be the last time.
Date:	Apr 04 00:09
Author:	JBug

OMG, my husband went to church and listened to all the sessions...I DARE him to call me his "Precious Possession". He would NOT say that without laughing, and he is a MAJOR TBM. That old geezer goat Gordo needs to have someone check his speeches before he gives them! He is so out of touch with modern life [as in after 1950] that you just have to laugh. They really should retire those guys BEFORE they get senile.

Subject:	Gordo is living in the past, for sure! He even said something to.
Date:	Apr 04 08:36
Author:	dumb and dumber
Mail Address:

a group of missionaries, recently (in very recent years), like "You don't look too good: but, the Lord will have to use you!"

This is a direct quote from a talk given by Matthew Cowley, in circa 1952, to a group of Missionary Elders getting ready to leave the MTC.

Gordy doesn't have an original thought in his doddering old head! (Has to pull old quotes out of his arse!)

Subject:	Remember, this is coming from the geezer...
Date:	Apr 04 16:48
Author:	NoLihoma

...who just a few years ago figured out that women could do amazing things now like drive and "run computers." He is SO useless, but only the good die young so he probably WILL outlive all of us!

Subject:	wow. I'm floored. Quotes like this make it hard for me to understand how anyone who considers themselves a feminist can stay in that church.
Date:	Apr 04 09:34
Author:	ava

That's just the way that I feel. Everyone has their own opinions and perspective.

But your wife is your possession???!? Sure - if she gets old and wrinkly - feel free to trade her in for a new model.

Many people will defend what he said, suggesting that what he meant was that men, women and children in a family should be valued. But that's not what he said.

Subject:	Why is anyone surprised that the Mormon Prophet would say this?
Date:	Apr 04 10:15
Author:	Lucyfer

This is an integral part of the belief system. Read the proclamation on the family for crying out loud. Mormonism is horrible in terms of how it views and treats women. the whole polygamous past - that is about ownership - having a stable of wives.

Mormon culture STINKS with this crap. Gordy is just telling it like it is.....

Subject:

True Lucyfer. I was just thinking that they had toned down the rhetoric in the past 5-7 years. Obviously, I was wrong.

Subject:	Right on Lucyfer!
Date:	Apr 04 10:20
Author:	wjd

There are even quotes where women are compared to cattle, why the surprise?

Subject:	I think you guys are all looking at it the wrong way
Date:	Apr 04 10:25
Author:	Just some guy

I don't understand why you guys all have your garments twisted up in a knot about this.

Here's the thing- the title of the first post referred to "my wife".

Hate to break it to you, but the language itself implies the wife is a possession of the husband when you refer to her as "yours". It's been a lot of years since school, but if I remember right such a bit of language is even called possessive.

And I really doubt that what was implied wasn't a two way street. The wife may be the most valuable possession of the husband, but I don't think the husband would protest at all to find that he is also the most valuable possession of the wife.

And so it should be.

When my wife and I married we gave each other to each other. Simple as that. And that's the key to a happy marriage. I am my wife's husband, and she is my wife. It's a state of mind that brings success and happiness to married life.

My opinion is that many marriages fail because people marry and instead of giving themselves away to their spouse, they just marry to get what they personally want (their spouse's love and affection) but consider themselves to still be free individuals.

Subject:	possessive? really?...
Date:	Apr 04 11:09
Author:	Lovechild

If I were to say that a particular person was "MY" business partner, would I be asserting ownership of that person. I don't think so.

For the same reason when I say "my wife" instead of "the woman I am married to," I am not asserting possession. My wife is my partner, not my property.

If I were to say, "Salt Lake City is my home town." would that be the equivalent of saying "I own Salt Lake City?? I don't think so.

Clearly, the word "my" in English should not be so narrowly construed as you are trying to make it.

Subject:	respectfully, I disagree
Date:	Apr 04 13:57
Author:	just some guy

Your business partner does imply ownership - as far as your business relationship is concerned. Similarly, your city implies the city is your city. Both cases imply some sense of ownership.

Your business partner has an obligation to you to seek the needs of your business above his own interestst in the business arena. This is why he is your partner. The fact that he is "yours" implies that he must put the needs of the relationship (in this case your business) above his own interests, and because he is "your partner", you must consider his needs and interests just as you would for any other possession you value. If you don't take care of your car, eventually it won't work for you. Same for your business partner, only his needs are more complex and include social needs along with mechanical. If your partner sought his own interests first, without concern for your business first, he wouldn't be much of a partner.

The same is really supposed to be true of "your city". As a citizen, you have to look after your city and the other side of the relationship is your city is there to serve you, the individual citizen. When citizens don't care to be involved in the care of their city (for example- taking part in elections, playing an active role in the community and speaking out with things you don't agree with or proposing things you feel the city needs) then "your city" will meet your needs less and less.

All relationships with "you" and "yours" are at the very root very similar, just how you care for what is yours becomes more complex or less depending on whether it is inanimate like a car, or a living being with feelings and thoughts as valid as your own, such as a spouse or business partner.

Subject:	One last thought about the ownership of business partners
Date:	Apr 04 14:04
Author:	just some guy

Consider the obligation your business partner has to not partner up with a business competitor at the same time he is a partner with you. As far as the arena of your specific business is concerned, you do own his loyalty until such a time as he frees himself from your relationship or you choose to terminate your relationship with him.

If your business partner doesn't belong to you in the business arena, then who does he belong to? I wouldn't want to partner with someone who saw himself as free of obligation to me in business, and I wouldn't want to partner with anyone who didn't feel the same way about my loyalty to them.

(I'm in business myself, and do have a partner).

Subject:	Merging resources to pursue shared interests...
Date:	Apr 04 14:16
Author:	Lovechild

is not how I would define possession. my partner's interest could change at any time and take steps to dissolve the partnership, including the disposition of whatever we jointly own.

Same with my wife, as she and I have entered into a contract. However, if my wife was a possession as in "owned property" there would be no requirement for shared interest. She could not negate my ownership any more than a car could deny my right to its title.

Subject:

Business partners...a straw man...In business one partner is not perceived as simply "possession" and "supporter" of the other partner n/t

Subject:	Why is it a straw man?...
Date:	Apr 05 04:57
Author:	Lovechild

How is saying "my" partner any less possessive than saying "my" wife??

How does saying "my wife" indicate that I consider her a possession, but saying "my partner" does not indicate that I consider that person a possession?

Subject:	The feeling that women are possessions is widespread in the church. It comes from...
Date:	Apr 04 13:04
Author:	Crystal Song

...the history of treating women like breeding cattle. If our only value is to breed, we become a possession. The outcome of this is no different than a 10th century viewpoint that a woman had no soul.

Subject:	Another quote from "Under the Banner of Heaven"...
Date:	Apr 04 15:24
Author:	wjd

"Here, the wife is pronounced as the husband's property, as much so as his manservant, his maidservant, his ox, or his horse..."

This quote was an extract from a manuscript called, "The Peacemaker", published in 1842, Nauvoo, Illinois the printer was Joseph Smith himself, speaking for polygamy.

Subject:

The whole 'religion' was set up by JS to keep women in line for sex and chores. I love the revelations to that 'rebel' Emma.

Recovery from Mormonism - The Mormon Church www.exmormon.org

Listing of additional short Topics | Main Page