Recovery Board  : RfM
Recovery from Mormonism (RfM) discussion forum. 
Go to Topic: PreviousNext
Go to: Forum ListMessage ListNew TopicSearchLog In
Posted by: esias ( )
Date: March 09, 2015 03:47PM

1. No, sir; none whatsoever ... I have never pretended to nor do I profess to have received revelations.

2. I don’t know how the missionaries find some of the people they find. The FBI can't find them, the police can’t find them, but our missionaries find them [laughter]. Why is that?

3. As I say, it never ceases to amaze me how gullible some of our Church members are.

4. I don’t want Mormonism to become to popular... we would be overrun by the wicked.

5. The backhand, show her the backhand. Every good woman knows the backhand.

6. Racial strife still lifts its ugly head . . . even right here among us.

7. One of the great leaders of Latin America. [presenting Book of Mormon to Chilean Fascist Dictator Augusto Pinochet]

8. How do you stop it? It's very simple. You stop Communist racial agitation; you arrest the leaders for conspiracy to commit murder, arson and burglary, prove their guilt in a court of law and lock them up. And you free the hands of our police so that the can prevent rioting and looting and arson by those citizens now convinced by the actions of our ‘Liberals’ that theft, incendiarism and assault will be tolerated.

Don’t kid yourself. The people who are behind all of this mean to have a civil war. We either stop them now or they will escalate this thing.

9. The dangers I speak of come from the gay-lesbian movement, the feminist movement (both of which are relatively new), and the ever-present challenge from the so-called scholars or intellectuals.

10. Sometimes masturbation is the introduction to the more serious sins of exhibitionism and the gross sin of homosexuality.

11. I was shocked to have you raise the question about oral lovemaking in the genital area among married couples. Heaven forbid any such degrading activities which would be abhorrent in the sight of the Lord. For any Latter-day Saint ... to engage in any kind of perversions of this sacred God-given gift of procreation would be sure to bring down the condemnation of the Lord whom we would offend were we to engage in any such practice.

12. Sometime after dinner we sent for some wine. It has been reported by some that this was taken as a sacrament. It was no such thing; our spirits were generally dull and heavy, and it was sent for to revive us ... I believe we all drank of the wine, and gave some to one or two of the prison guards.



1. Reed Smoot Hearings US Senate 1904. Joseph F Smith:

2. Gordon B Hinckley, fifteenth el presidente

3. Harold B Lee

4. Brigham Young, 15th May 1864, second president

5. Thomas S Monson, Calgary Temple dedication, cited Elder Chris Lyons et al

6. Gordon B Hinckley, General Conference address 2006

7. Spencer W Kimball

8. Ezra Taft Benson, 'An Enemy Hath Done This' p335, citing article Susan L M Huck, originally John Birch magazine

9. Purple Emperor His Haile Majesty in Waiting Boyd K Packer, Talk to the All-Church Coordinating Council 18th May 1993

10. Spencer W Kimball, President Kimball Speaks Out on Morality, LDS New Era November 1980 p39

11. Harold B Lee letter 17th May 1973

12. John Taylor, History of the Church 7:101

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: saucie ( )
Date: March 09, 2015 09:42PM

Excellent find Esias.... thank you.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: elderolddog ( )
Date: March 09, 2015 10:49PM

Regarding #11, the guy wrote back to President Lee with a further question and Bro. Lee went to the Lord in humble prayer and had it confirmed to him by rhe Lord that there was indeed a birthday exception.

I still have that postcard from President Lee!

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: saucie ( )
Date: March 09, 2015 11:12PM

elderolddog Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Regarding #11, the guy wrote back to President Lee
> with a further question and Bro. Lee went to the
> Lord in humble prayer and had it confirmed to him
> by rhe Lord that there was indeed a birthday
> exception.
>
> I still have that postcard from President Lee!


hahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahha the old birthday exception

ploy. I love it.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: I once believed all this.... ( )
Date: March 09, 2015 10:18PM

Nice compilation of the inspired crazy. Well done.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Stray Mutt ( )
Date: March 09, 2015 10:26PM

Good thing they have prophets to lead them in the paths of... something.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: randy ( )
Date: March 10, 2015 08:43PM

#11 Where this information comes from.

Heaven forbid any such degrading activities which would be abhorrent in the sight of the Lord.

Really? I'd like to see the reference on that one! Total bull shit! Heaven, The Lord, God, Jesus, has never said ONE word about oral stimulation in ANY SCRIPTURES I have ever read. Including the Book of Mormon. I challenge anyone to give me a biblically or book of Mormon or even D*C reference to anything that would back this Bull shit up. This is ONE old man's personal sexual hang up opinion and nothing more.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: randy ( )
Date: March 10, 2015 08:46PM

Please post the entire letter that is the source for #11

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: randy ( )
Date: March 11, 2015 04:35AM

Please post the reference of where I can find and read this "Letter" from

11. Harold B Lee letter 17th May 1973

I have googled this and can find nothing...where can I find this letter you have referred to. Please provide more information so this can be verified.

Thanks

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: randy ( )
Date: March 11, 2015 08:40AM

Thanks for following up on this question which is very important to me. I'm glad to read that page you send me to.

My problem remain still though and here is why. In that article it gives the quote in question #11 and then gives as reference for that

http://www.solotouch.com/res.php?&t=a&num=22

Which appears to be some sort of sex site to start with. I also noticed that the complete reference just reverted back to

http://www.solotouch.com without the additional information.

So I entered into the browser the additional information ie /res.php?&t=a&num=22 and again it just rejected it and went back to the first part without the additional information.

So in the end there still is no Reference which remotely proves that this statement came from Harold B. Lee.

Now I appreciate all these other statements on the subject and I have not yet taken time to see if their references are any better but in the end even if I can find the actual letter this quote comes from we are left with the LDS church using all kinds of general language which leads me to make this statement:

HOW ARE YOU DEFINING ORAL SEX? To me the simple answer is - oral sex is any time you are using your mouth during sex to either stimulate yourself or your partner, in which case oral sex starts with kissing doesn't it?

It would seem to me that the LDS church has been very careful to use a term like Oral sex without DEFINING what that is exactly. Is it Kissing? Is it using your mouth to KISS the breast of your female partner or if you are female using your mouth to KISS a mans testicles or his penis? Is it not oral sex if a man kisses his wifes breasts but it is oral sex if he puts her nipple inside his mouth etc.

​​
You see to me without a clear Definition of what is meant by Oral sex, it's easy to call Oral sex this or that perverted thing, or un-natural or all those other phrases they have used on that page you sent me to, in talking about it, and all without defining what it is exactly?

Everyone wants to quote things like avoiding doing anything "like unto it" when talking about fornication for example, but for Heaven sakes, having Intercourse is LIKE UNTO fornication isn't it?

To tell people that something is evil and offensive to God etc and not define specifically what that something is other than to use a term like Oral sex, which would mean a thousand different things to a thousand different people is crazy?

Depending upon how sexually hung up someone is, if a boy/man for example uses his tongue and plays with his partners navel, or her ass hole, or her ear, is all that ORAL sex? Is any of it oral sex. Is a FRENCH kiss and your tongue inside the mouth of your partner ORAL SEX?

Without a clear definition for this term I'm left with more questions than answers.

Can anyone lead me to a source where the LDS church has defined what ORAL sex consists of and specifically what is not part of oral sex and is in their opinion OK?

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: moose ( )
Date: March 11, 2015 12:59PM

The problem with the solotouch site is that it requires membership to enter. Without membership, you get returned to the login page.

So, we'll have to find another source for the quote.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: randy ( )
Date: March 11, 2015 03:28PM

Well if this solotouch site is your idea of a source for what LDS church official says, I don't put much stock in the post period.

I notice you chose not to address the bigger issue of defining oral sex.

With a couple of clicks it was easy to see that the page you sent me to was just another anti mormon website...not of any value when trying to verify things.

Anyone can write anything and put someone picture by it and say they said it in such and such place and then when someone honest like me say I think I'll check that out, you find that the references are worthless just like the ones you have given me.

Don't misunderstand me, I hate the Mormon Church for the 50 years of my life it wasted, but I need real statements no matter what the subject matter is, with real sources that can be verified.

So far you're original post has little to no value with one reference being a porn site, and the whole thing being traced back to an anti mormon site that is unverified thus the information could be total bull shit. Not much of a post I'd say!

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: baneberry ( )
Date: March 11, 2015 06:42PM

randy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well if this solotouch site is your idea of a
> source for what LDS church official says, I don't
> put much stock in the post period.
>
> I notice you chose not to address the bigger issue
> of defining oral sex.
>
> With a couple of clicks it was easy to see that
> the page you sent me to was just another anti
> mormon website...not of any value when trying to
> verify things.
>
> Anyone can write anything and put someone picture
> by it and say they said it in such and such place
> and then when someone honest like me say I think
> I'll check that out, you find that the references
> are worthless just like the ones you have given
> me.
>
> Don't misunderstand me, I hate the Mormon Church
> for the 50 years of my life it wasted, but I need
> real statements no matter what the subject matter
> is, with real sources that can be verified.
>
> So far you're original post has little to no value
> with one reference being a We are to porn site, and the
> whole thing being traced back to an anti mormon
> site that is unverified thus the information could
> be total bull shit. Not much of a post I'd say!

I was told any "impure and unholy practice" is self-evident because you "grieve the spirit" and you know what you do/did was not right. This was the definition I received.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Shamuzu ( )
Date: March 15, 2015 06:35PM

I, for one, understand your concern. Perhaps, the bigger concern might shift focus on "the ramifications of" such actions deemed "ORAL SEX".
In the medical community, it seems quite well-known that the term "oral sex" applies to either 1) fellatio, or 2) cunnilingus.

The following links give the complete definition of each:


https://www.google.com/search?q=what+is+fellacio%3F&oq=what+is+fellacio%3F&aqs=chrome..69i57.6814j0j1&sourceid=chrome&client=aff-cs-360chromium&ie=UTF-8#q=what+is+fellatio%3F


https://www.google.com/search?q=what+is+cunnilingus%3F&oq=what+is+cunnilingus%3F&aqs=chrome..69i57.6159j0j1&sourceid=chrome&client=aff-cs-360chromium&ie=UTF-8


Personally, I believe that people miss an important point, however, in not asking the right question, about these types of activities:

(Medically-speaking), what is the natural consequence of engaging in such activities? (In particular, in cunnilingus).

To digress slightly, one who were to engage in anal sex with an HIV-infected homosexual male would be highly likely to get the same virus as the sexual partner, because so-called 'protection' does not stop the virus (which is a very tiny organism) from going right through such protective materials. The "natural consequence" in this type of case, then, would be to acquire the virus.

In ORAL SEX (cunnilingus), one must be aware that the female reproductive system can acquire what is referred to as "a resident population of strains (viz., varieties) of the Human Papilloma.Virus, or HPV". This is another way of saying that one or more of the 100+ kinds of HPV may "live there", in sexually-active women.

The "danger" of cunnilingus, to be certain, is to the man. There are 9,000 new cases of a specific oral cancer--oropharyngeal cancer--every year, in the United States. This type of cancer develops from a specific strain of HPV, which is acquired by the man during this type of oral sex. It is a slow-growing cancer that may take up to 20 years, from the time of exposure to the virus, until the cellular changes in the throat, pharynx, and tongue become cancerous.

Some have postulated that HPV-initiated oropharyngeal cancer may become the next AIDS epidemic: as young people, these days, are more likely to engage in this type of behavior than their parents' generation. The well-known actor, Michael Douglas, developed throat cancer which he is certain came from this type of sexual activity: he used himself as a sort of "poster boy", to bring to people a greater awareness of the "fall-out" from doing this type of thing.

Even if it is "Russian roulette" (in which case, one may or may not suffer a consequence), these types of acts--whether ethical or unethical; moral, immoral, or even amoral--DO have a "natural consequence" attached to them.

The real question is this: Do you want to live long enough to see "your" grandchildren graduate and get their university degree? Do you want to be "alive and healthy", when those same grandkids get married?

What people decide for their lives in the "here and now" actually DOES determine their future: in some small (or even great) way.

Options: ReplyQuote
Go to Topic: PreviousNext
Go to: Forum ListMessage ListNew TopicSearchLog In


Screen Name: 
Your Email (optional): 
Subject: 
Spam prevention:
Please, enter the code that you see below in the input field. This is for blocking bots that try to post this form automatically.
       **  **     **  ********   **     **  **     ** 
       **  **     **  **     **  **     **  **     ** 
       **  **     **  **     **  **     **  **     ** 
       **  *********  ********   *********  **     ** 
 **    **  **     **  **     **  **     **   **   **  
 **    **  **     **  **     **  **     **    ** **   
  ******   **     **  ********   **     **     ***