Let's take a look at what we learn about this in the temple.

Someone shared this on the Uncensored Mormons facebook feed... so crazy when it's all laid out like this!

"The LDS Temple teaches that women should not get the Priesthood. The Lord will never give women the Priesthood as the temple specifically teaches against it. Over and over the temple teaches that women are separated from the power of God, and can only access that power through men. Below are examples:

*Adam helps make the earth, Eve does not.
*Adam is made directly by Christ, Eve is made through a piece of Adam.
*Adam is named directly by God, Eve is named by Adam. Eve is given to Adam, Adam is not given to Eve.
*Adam is specifically by name given the Garden of Eden, Eve is not.
*Adam covenants directly to obey God. Eve covenants to obey her husband.
*Adam is ordained to be a King and Priest to God, Eve is only ordained to be a Queen and Priestess to her husband.
*In the prayer circle when God’s presence is called into the room, Eve must veil her face as she cannot have direct access to God’s power. Her connection to God is through the grip of the man next to her. The man has direct communion with God.
*When they are kicked out of the Garden, Adam builds an alter prays to God, Eve does not.
*When women die, their faces are veiled symbolizing their inability to have direct access to God’s presence. Instead, their husbands must bring them into God’s presence by knowing their secret temple name. The women do not know their husbands’ name as he does not need her to bring him through the veil.
*In the sealing, the wife gives herself to the husband. The husband simply receives the wife, he does not need to give himself.
*Yes, men must be married to get into the highest level of Celestial Kingdom but that is NOT because he lacks the full priesthood without her, but because the highest level of the Celestial Kingdom has eternal increase, so he needs a woman to create his children. Over and over again the temple teaches that women should not have direct access to God’s power and it is only through their relationship with men that they can have access to the Priesthood Power of God.".



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 06/26/2014 11:23AM by closer2fine.

LDS women are the property of their men.

So, if you don't have a wiener, you'd better figure out a way to grab hold of one. It's the only thing that's gonna save you, barbie doll.

And don't worry so much about grammar. They know what you mean.

...but come the afterlife it'll all make sense and you'll totally love it or at least endure it for all eternity.

Exactly!

These are all the "core teachings" that say why women can't have the priesthood.

A lot of these things aren't known by the general public.

But you have to be pregnant for eternity......GAG!

A LOT of good the temple name will do me... my husband can't ever remember it!

My new name is Elicia.

Urban Dictionary:
Elicia
a name referring to a beautiful, classy, elegant, loveable, cute, magical goddess. Anyone with this name is rare and amazing.

At least they got that right! :)



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 06/26/2014 02:28PM by braindead.

This is rad. Spelled out like this in one big gulp, it actually makes sense. It would seem that any endowed and sealed female has agreed to abide by all of these principles.

This really comes home to me, with the highest degree of irony. Because my DW claims to be a true believer, and a massive supporter and defender of the temple and the priesthood. She is one of the anti-feminist Mo housewives. She thinks that women are totally wrong to want the priesthood, or to challenge the leadership in any way.

And yet, outside of the temple and other church buildings, she demands the right to absolute and complete freedom and self-determination, as if she had never made such covenants of obedience or had never accepted a subservient or subordinate position in the priesthood.

The cog dis is just---beyond all understanding.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/26/2014 05:38AM by hello.

Yes. This is another totally annoying thing about TBMs. They rely completely on the advancements of secular society in order to endure the stupid rules of their club. So, while enjoying the freedoms of secular society that make their religious game endurable, they still condemn secular society and hold it in contempt. They actually look forward to the time when they can play-act forever, or when Jesus comes and forces the game on the rest of us in perpetuity.

It's like dressing in cumbersome long skirts and tight vests for a Renaissance fair, knowing you can go back to shorts and a tee-shirt when its over. Yet forgetting that the only thing that makes the Renaissance fair any fun for a woman is knowing that its temporary--it's just a game. A woman would be insane actually to want to go back to the Renaissance permanently.

I don't think cog dis is the right word. I think its lack of appreciation. Taking advantage of society and its freedoms, without ever giving credit to it, and even looking down on it.

Yes, I understand what you are saying, and agree. Altho in my DW's case, this psychological complex is very personal, and part of her unique approach to life. But yes, until she is willing to commit fully to practice in the real world the covenants she has made in the temple, for her the Mormon life is very much a form of play-acting, one that cannot be separated from self-will.

The further irony of course, is that I have sincerely attempted to be among the most laissez-faire of husbands. I never thought I should be the sole decider, regardless of the teachings of the temple. I tried to foster a mutual equality as spouses and parents in the family. I have been generally ok with whatever she wanted to do, and only very rarely asked her to follow my lead on anything. And as a matter of habit and principle, and because I recognize her need to be involved, I have sought to partner with her, to receive her advice and counsel, and have joined with her in any decision-making process for the good of the family. We're not perfect, and we have had to learn from consequence when we made poor decisions, but we have partnered. And we have generally avoided power games and resentments.

But as events unfolded, in time she became unwilling to partner with me in any way, and insisted on being the sole decider, regardless of her covenants or the often poor results of her choices. I believe this pattern arises in her personality, and not from any social changes regarding the role of women in the wider culture. I have come to understand that this is who she is, since a young girl. And that's fine. But it just doesn't fit with her faith professions regarding the Mormon priesthood and temple covenants. Thus the cog dis.

Now, I don't even try any more. The kids are grown, our finances are separate (altho I am the main payer in the household), her freedom of choice and action as a sovereign individual is absolute, and my garments are off. I have withdrawn from the false game of Mormon priesthood, and from all illusion of partnership. For myself, there are no covenants. If Eve is confused, that's not Adam's problem any more.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/26/2014 08:36PM by hello.

Not only the temple endowment ceremony shows and teaches the subordinate status of sisters in the church. According to Tom Philips, the second anointing ordinance, performed in upper rooms of temples, does also. IIRC, from Tom's account, the ordinance blessing is pronounced in full upon his head, but the blessing for the wife is simply secondarily pronounced "in common with her husband", without a full recapitulation. The wife/goddess then washes her husband's feet in a special private ceremony in a separate room in the temple, but the husband/god does not wash her feet. She pronounces a blessing upon his head, but he does not do likewise for her.

They are both united in the ordinance, but it is clear that the husband, and his priesthood, are the central focus of the ordinance.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/29/2014 03:35AM by hello.

Women are nice accessories and property to the penishood. nothing more. Most Mormonguys are not looking after personality, most are scared off when the girl has education and success in her job and doesn't fit thebstandards otherwise.

The most 30+ never married ones I know are having personality, life experience, a high education and a career. They don't fit the bimbo cliche. Those who having 6+ kids around their 30's mostly do.
FAQ on Mosingle 25+ sites on FB are:
*Will you date woman with higher education than yours?
*Will you date woman with some extra pounds?
*Will you date woman with higher income?
*Will you date a woman "significant" older than you (more than 5 years)

All the penishoodholder bow their head and say yes but between the lines you read "no way".

On the other hand you found a lot of these woman willing to date and marry everyone as long as he holds the penishood and a TR, to fulfill their "duty".

I was pitied so often - talked behind my back if I'm probably lesbian since my sister is, too. Who knows? - that I am still "not a mother" and were discussed, what could be worng with me? I even was a topic in ward council, when I turned 30. I served a mission and always held a TR, always a nice spirit and caring... how could this be?
oh wait I know: I don't fit their cliche. I have some pounds extra, I have a high education, can fix broken tires and stuff like that and I dare to think and speak for myself.

And now having a steady BF for more than half a year and still don't't think about marriage.... how could this be? Na he must be awkward too, having such an old shag. Two awkwardies - better tie the knot.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/26/2014 07:31AM by newnameabigail.

How about this alternative interpretation... the distance between God and Eve is because of horny Joe's even hornier God. Cain and Able were supposed to be born first, not Jesus, and the only way to achieve that was for God to not even look at Eve, especially when she was in the garden of Eden all innocent and NAKED!

As for the wife relying on the husband to get to the celestial kingdom, we all know that an unchanging God's eternal temple covenants can be changed. Old unpopular covenants disappear down the memory hole. In Joseph Smith's time women were pretty much the property of men, and the temple covenants are a reflection of those times. They could easily cut the outdated sexism if they wanted to.

The list is a pretty damning indication of just how sexist the mormon cult is.

Be like Adam and blame Eve.

"she gave me of the fruit of the tree and I did eat."
https://www.lds.org/scriptures/pgp/moses/4.18?lang=eng

Equal? No, men are taught to blame women who will be punished for tempting men to disobey god. Men have a cop-out, it is the woman's fault.

Good post. It really hammers home just how far apart OW is with the big 15 and current LDS doctrine.

Now I know why my mother drug her feet for 15 years to be baptized, then finally did it just for the money. Now my dad just sleeps on the couch.

And they're miserable, and say they're soooo happy.

Eternal blessings, temporal sacrifice! Ha!

Topping.
These are some points I need to commit to memory.

Thanks for sharing that. It's going in my file.

Mormons are always saying, "You'll learn something new every time you go to the temple." I'm pretty sure this isn't what they had in mind, but I guess they were right after all.

I think dear sister Kate Kelly should have a good look at this.

Well, when you put it like that it does sound a tiny bit like the women folk "may" be getting the short end of the stick.

What a clever way to list it all. Makes the discrepancy very black and white.

Even as TBM as I was, when I went for endowments in '69 I was shocked at the women putting the veils over the face. Watching my mother put a veil over her face, bow her head and say yes just felt wrong. But I just thought, well, if that's what God wants . . .

Women had it even worse before the 1990 endowment changes which gave a greater role to Eve and made them somewhat less subservient to men.

Don't forget that the endowment came from the minds of 19th century polygamous men.