I don't recall any teachings about sex in heaven from my 38 years of activity in the church. So I read the statement below from another thread and wondered if someone could explain how women will be sexually exploited in the celestial kingdom. Even if there is polygamy, I don't know how that is sexual exploitation. In fact, seems each wife would have less sex that way because there are more women to satisfy each husband.

"But if Mormon heaven is what we get, I'd rather live as Barbie and Ken in the terrestrial or telestial kingdom than spend eternity being sexually exploited in the celestial."

Maybe if I'd had something to drink, I would, but I just can't even...

Well there has been 100,000,000,000 people who have lived on the earth supposedly since the beginning of time which means they had to be spiritually conceived carried around for nine months and birthed then grew up to full stature. I always thought that one big-mamma-goddess (the Queen of Olympus) birthed them all. Her name is Juno wife of Zeus.

So the sex must have been pretty regular for at least that long?

Celestial Sex = Mental Masturbation.

Women will still be the same, but men will have hundreds of organs, to accommodate all their wives at once. Makes sense.

All the plan requires is that sperm grow wings.

Eternity of producing heavenly offspring, basically promises endless sex for the male. What a reward, like 72 virgins..its all about ego.

Exactly. You have a Celestial Kingdom conceived of by men during a very patriarchal time in our country when women didn't even have the right to vote. Enough said.

Religion always reflects the era during which man made it.

It's taking a unique human being with talents, knowledge, personality, and goals and reducing her to the ability to be impregnated...and you're wondering how that's sexual exploitation? Does it matter if she has any other trait than a vagina? Nope. Sounds like hell to any woman with self-esteem.

+1000. That's exactly what I was thinking.

I think it's strange that someone would think the *amount* of sex makes it less exploitative. It's exploitative not because of how much sex they're being asked to have, but because that is what their value is being reduced to.

doubtisavirtue Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It's
> exploitative not because of how much sex they're
> being asked to have, but because that is what
> their value is being reduced to.

And they're not being "asked," either -- they're being commanded.

Of course, there IS no celestial kingdom, and none of this is actually going to happen...but it's the idea of it that is disgusting to people of both genders who understand that women are individual beings, not vaginas and wombs for me to exploit.

Thanks for adding this! I think the OP could learn a lot from you :)

Free, you seem to think that all women want less sex. Wrong! Some of us actually like it. And women are human beings, not just vaginas. And I for one want an actual relationship with my Loved One... all of him.

Hetero.

Gotta be hetero.

Front door only.

No back door.

No oral.

Yeah. Sorry. No oral. That's nasty.

Only righteous, front door, hetero.

Sorry. What? You thought the CK was about fun?

Garmies on. Can't take off your garmies.

Next question?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/19/2015 04:00AM by beyondashadow.

There will be no mormon garmies in heaven! Not in my heaven, anyway. And not only wearing white, either.

The idea of continual intercoarse does not sound like Heaven but rather the opposite. Is there no time to go fishing in the CK?

michaelc1945 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The idea of continual intercoarse does not sound
> like Heaven....

I know "intercoarse" was a typo, Michael, but still a prescient one!

As a Christian, I acknowledge that there are areas on which the Bible is silent, areas where the Bible is explicit, and in-between areas where the Bible can be confusing or where we have to discern, and apply as best we can, general principles and concepts.

Does TSCC or recognized apologists and scholars* have the wisdom, sense, and nerve to acknowledge that their "revelations" don't give details on this? I know problems are sometimes dismissed with the remark, "This is not necessary for your salvation," but one would think they would at least attempt to treat the problems of "eternal progression" with a bit of discussion.

I'd have a lot more respect for them if they said, "We simply don't know the precise mechanism(s) for this, but trust the transmutation between the natures of celestial glory and physical, human generation is accomplished in some wondrous, probably mystical, way. Bear in mind, dear skeptic, that millions and billions of units of time we call 'years' are involved--quite sufficient for eternal progression and the populating of worlds to take place."

Anybody ever come across such arguments? Although insufficient, there would be a certain sense to them, and would satisfy TBMs.

*I use the term loosely here.

You must consider life in the CK from the perspective of an out-of-control sex addict with an insatiable appetite for women without number.

JS only made it to #34 or #40 or whatever. He would have most likely put Warren Jeffs to shame had JS died of old age (successfully escaping angry mob after angry mob).

beyondashadow Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You must consider life in the CK from the
> perspective of an out-of-control sex addict with
> an insatiable appetite for women without number.
>
> JS only made it to #34 or #40 or whatever. He
> would have most likely put Warren Jeffs to shame
> had JS died of old age (successfully escaping
> angry mob after angry mob).

Maybe somebody should have explained to JS that it's about quality, not quantity...? :)

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/19/2015 09:30AM by snuckafoodberry.

Maybe you should actually read a book about the women that escaped polygamy and/or watch the documentaries and television shows (you can watch them online) on the children and women exploited and abused in the polygamy cults. From your many, many previous posts about how TSCC is a "matriarchal institution," it's crystal clear that you have tunnel vision when it comes to the exploitation of women in both the mainstream cult and the fundie ones. You lack a sociological perspective on this issue.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/19/2015 10:34AM by Itzpapalotl.

Which is sex exploitation.

Yes to all the above. Per the original plan set out by JS and his successors, the kind of sex will be whatever the man (king/god) wants. The women are there for his comfort.

Apparently men who were dicks in this life will have them in the next one.

Heavenly Father spent over 28 eternities deciding the final flesh form for mankind and womankind. The original femal breast was octoganal. The male probe was at first an obelisk.

I urge you to study the final physical shapes of man and woman, but more so, I would ask you to learn more about the process He took in order to finalize human ecstasy.

https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=History+of+phallic+structures

Your premise and assumption is that all women want the least amount of sex possible, now and in heaven.

So... it's a great deal for the woman to be eternally pregnant, while her husband is perpetually impregnating other women? Do you understand how that would eliminate a soul, by assuming women are simply incubators? Why not a blow-up doll test tube?

If your wife was having sex with as many men as possible, eternally, preferably young, hot men? And, creating universes... Which religion is that?

Think about what LDS females have been taught as doctrine their entire lives, and the wreckage of Joseph Smith, Warren Jeffs... It is the definition of exploitation. They assumed they knew what God and women wanted, which didn't turn out too well in those instances.

Holy

Did you misspell Holy? If so, you'll have to be a bit more specific, given the various anatomical options.

Your question makes me wonder about your attitudes about women in general.


You might as well say a dog should be happy being one of many pets because he won't have to fetch the master's slippers as often. Don't you see that women are not pets assigned to a man to help him have eternal offspring?


You can tell a lot about people by the heaven they design. The problem is that they expect others to have their values. It's obvious that JS wanted eternal sex and power (to be a god even). So, that's what the heaven he made up includes. Funny how women are viewed as things for men to line up and screw for variety. This isn't hard to figure out. It's the LDS version of 72 versions.

Joseph Smith lost his versionity around 9 times.

I wonder what became of the other 63 versions?

Of course, I refer to The First Virgin.

... hold on ... I think I confused myself ...

... never mind ... I obviously need some help ...

(This post will make no sense after the OP corrects his mistypo.)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/20/2015 03:46PM by beyondashadow.

missionary position