The 1958 edition of Bruce R McConkie's MORMON DOCTRINE states that those using condoms or any artificial contraception are "in rebellion against God and are guilty of gross wickedness."

I never knew that it was once such an insane belief.

The 1968 BYU Honor Code states that "the Church does not approve of any form of birth control."

So in 1968, if a BYU married couple used condoms or pills or whatever, they could be subject to severe disciplinary action? Huh? ultra-wacky crazy . . .

I guess this explains why my oldest sister had 8 kids after marrying a guy from SLC who was from an impoverished family and had 9 siblings (family of 12). My sister's first 5 kids came in a 6 year period! how often have you heard of that? well . . . of course, the Duggars would like to pop out a new bundle of joy every 10 months if possible.

Like vast numbers of various things, modern Church teachings are completely different from past beliefs & teachings. Today, I would imagine that LDS married couples have total freedom to use any and all contraception methods. But really, for the LDS church and any other church, this should totally be NOYDB!

none of your damn business

Yes, and missionaries were told to get married right off of their mission, and not wait for college graduation or a career. Immediate early fast marriages + no birth control = growing new cult members. Newborns have always been the cult's Number One source of new members.

Our TBM neighbors and ward members are always asking my TBM daughter when she is going to have another baby. She has two school-age children. I told my daughter to tell them exactly that: NOYDB!

I'm her mother, and we are close, but I respect her and her husband enough to NEVER ask them anything like that.

Mormons don't respect boundaries.

Christianity positions itself in opposition to nature in its foundational teaching that nature is in a fallen state, and that we are supposed to struggle against nature and align ourselves with God instead. That idea is repeated throughout the Bible & in some Mormon writings, too. Normal, natural human impulses are stigmatized, etc., etc.

But when it comes to birth control, they appeal to nature -- the same one they've been telling us is fallen and opposed to God -- and tell us to just passively let natural processes happen without exercising any kind of forethought or free will. No explanation of why it's wrong to be your natural self in other situations, but admirable to let it all hang out reproductively.

But it gets worse: healing is a major theme throughout the Bible, too. Most Christian denominations believe in and pray for healing from physical disease, and none that I know of are opposed to medicine. Why not let nature run its course when it comes to illness, too?

Christianity can't even decide whether nature should be controlled or submitted to. I don't know how anyone could look at that complete theological mess and not see the blatant manipulation. There is no real guiding principle -- just do as we tell you in this particular situation.

Their rule of thumb: Interpret nature in a way to produce as many followers and faith promoting stories as possible.

. . . . so if I was to oversimplify the history of LDS growth, I'd say there's 2 main sources of growth:

1. encourage marrying within the faith & have lots of kids & encourage the kids to be dedicated to the cult & and repeat for the next generation. Once the Saints in early Utah reached membership of 100,000, the formula produced steady growth for many generations of Mormons. Church population was destined to reach a million and then 2 million and onward and upward . . .

2. focus on generating new converts in parts of the world where Americans were generally liked, and the people weren't resistant to trying a change in religion. Potentially, the best examples are Mexico and Brazil, which are now #2 and #3 in terms of number of members on the books. Of course, vast numbers are inactive. Eventually, even places like Mexico & Brazil (and other places in Central & South America) will stagnate and decline.

Out of desperation, the "hot spot" for LDS conversions could be Africa. Elimination of priesthood ban is over 40 years now, and so they are building a bunch of African temples, and hoping for big success.

Europe is a complete disaster for the LDS church, which appears destined to shrink to nothingness in most parts of Europe.

“Out of desperation, the "hot spot" for LDS conversions could be Africa.”

Won’t having to put interracial couples to death be a little awkward?

The crazy thing is that there were some married couples (maybe a husband or wife) that would actually admit to contraception in a bishops interview, believing that they cannot hide anything from the Lord's all-knowing mouth piece. When I was a married guy at Wymount Terrace (YBU), I remember the Bishop asking if we used any form of contraception "in cluding condoms" and I would fervently say, "Absolutely not Bishop because I know this is an abomination before the Lord and such evil practice keeps the noble and choice spirits from obtain body's here." Then he would say, "Then why isn't Sister Smith pregnant?..you've been married for 2 years." I would just say, IDK Bish, we should probably see a specialist. Even then I was thinking how full of shite this was, prodding about my private life. I remember him looking deep into my eyes to see if I would blink. Such BS. To be a good Mormon, you have to learn to act and lie like a "B"...it's crazy.

There was a couple in our YBU ward, and I used to work out with the husband. He was related to Mormon royalty, and he told me that his relative (an uncle who was a 70's) advised hi to use BC until he graduated. See, so there are the rules for the sheepie and then rules for the royalty.

so I asked and I was told contraception was okay by the person I asked. Thankfully, I was never asked about contraception in a bishopric interview.

But we were definitely taught it. Women aren't supposed to have tubes tied and men aren't supposed to have vasectomies or weren't. Not sure if it has been talked about in GC.

I believe the MORMON slant against bc was the use of "artificial" means;

so what about coitus interruptus or the 'rhythm method' (measuring - predicting the woman's fertile times & avoiding (vaginal, ha ha) sex during them)


we see again & again it's not so much the effects - outcome but in Morland rather ChurchCo intervention & micro-management of nearly everything.

While on my mission, I asked a visiting GA (name now forgotten, but he was male and he was old, so...) about "Family Planning", in my mind thinking that this covered birth control. His response was that the church just wanted you to plan on having a family and the details were left up to the couple and heavenly papa.

Big whoop, though, because my BYU temple bride, married end of May, 1968, bore our first child in early May of 1969.

I'm a little suspicious of that supposed quote from the 1968 BYU Honor Code. I was there then, and this is not ringing any bells with me.

Also note that "does not approve of any form of birth control" is not the same thing as saying they are opposed to all forms of birth control. A legalistic distinction to be sure, but LDS Inc thrives on being legalistic. Just listen to anything Dallin Oaks says about anything.

D.O. McKay's FP / SM letter mentioned 'artificial' means, the context of this was the availability of bc pills which made bc more convenient and palatable to many. Also switched some of the responsibility to females...

Given you were at BYU in 1968 (that puts you >70 years) you actually remember what the BYU honor code said in 1968...over 50 years ago? That's impressive :)

No, I don't remember, but I think that would have generated enough discussion at the time that I would have remembered it. I know LDS Inc discouraged contraception, but it doesn't seem like the sort of thing that would be in the Honor Code.

I also had an interesting honor code run-in which caused me to read the fine print rather closely, so I am more familiar with it than the average bear.

BYU library or registrar probably has all past catalogs on file, if anyone has the ambition to stop in and look up the 1968 Honor Code.

I think we all agree that BYU has 'always' felt the need to conform to FP statements as well as generalized 'doctrines' of ChurchCo, therefore this being in the honor code isn't out of context.

Here's a link to the 1968 Catalog of Courses,

https://archive.org/details/catalogofcourses19681970brig

The Honor Code starts on page 39.

Shades of the Smith Field House and running from line to line to get the classes you needed. My first time there, spring semester, 1968 (I first arrived in mid-semester, Fall, 1967, as part of the church’s plan to shield RMs from the Draft), I was really, really amazed by the sights and sounds. Add to that the roving Honor Code stooges conducting hair and dress length inspections, and it was downright shocking.

This makes three of us there at the same time that I'm aware of. The other one is Bobofitz.

This is not some sort of hypothetical. Either the Honor Code includes the statement alleged by OP, or it does not. If you check the link posted above to the catalog, it contains no such statement.

QED



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/20/2019 05:26PM by Brother Of Jerry.

Ha! The membership thought otherwise. It’s all about what the members let the leaders get away with. The members complained that it was not the leaders business of whether they had oral sex or not. The members hated wearing one piece garments. The members used birth control and said it was none of the church’s business. The ball is in the member’s court. If enough don’t like something it scares the leadership into changing.

A few quotes:

"Those who attempt to pervert the ways of the Lord, and to prevent their offspring from coming into the world...are guilty of one of the most heinous crimes in the category. There is no promise of eternal salvation and exaltation for such as they... " (Joseph Fielding Smith, Relief Society Magazine, 3:267-368, July 1916)

“There is one thing that I am told is practiced to some extent among us, and I say to you that where it is practiced and not thoroughly repented of the curse of God will follow it. I refer to the practice of preventing the birth of children. I want to lift my voice in solemn warning against this, and I say to you that the woman who practices such devilish arts, or the man who consents to them, will be cursed of God. Such persons will be cursed in their bodies, cursed in their minds, cursed in their property, cursed in their offspring. God will wipe them out from the midst of this people and nation. Remember it. Mothers, teach this to your daughters, for I tell you it is true. I need not pronounce any curse, whatever my authority may be, but I say to you that women who take this course, and men who consent to it, will be cursed of God Almighty, and it will rest upon them until their generation shall be blotted out, and their name shall be lost from the midst of the Saints of God, unless, as I have said, there is deep, thorough and heartfelt repentance.” (Apostle George Q. Cannon, Collected Discourses, v. 5, October 7, 1894)



“The world teaches birth control. Tragically, many of our sisters subscribe to its pills and practices when they could easily provide earthly tabernacles for more of our Father's children. We know that every spirit assigned to this earth will come, whether through us or someone else. There are couples in the Church who think they are getting along just fine with their limited families but who will someday suffer the pains of remorse when they meet the spirits that might have been part of their posterity.” (Prophet Ezra Taft Benson, Conference Report, April 1969, p. 12)

“It is contradictory to this covenant to prevent the birth of children if the parents are in good health.
“Thirty-five years ago when I first started practicing medicine, it was a rare thing for a married woman to seek advice about how she could keep from having babies. When I finished practicing medicine, it was a rare thing, except for some faithful Latter-day Saint women, for a married woman to want to have more than one or two children, and some did not want any children. We in the Church must not be caught up in the false doctrines of the world that would cause us to break sacred temple covenants.” (Seventy J. Ballard Washington, April 1995 General Conference)

Well, now I feel just terrible!!

Well as a single person who is unconventional in many ways, I see this differently than people with more opportunities (presumably like the posters above). If a person has the chance to live a conservative traditional life then that is probably the best thing they could do that will lead to happiness. If a girl waits a lot of things can go wrong because it's not easy to have a baby especially if your over 50 when you actually have money hopefully. It's not wise to wait till your rich, smart, own a house, or happy because our health is not guaranteed to last.

Just my two cents.

If a girl waits until she is over 50, she's no longer a girl. So there's that.

" If a person has the chance to live a conservative traditional life then that is probably the best thing they could do that will lead to happiness."

Do you stuff your own shirts, or do you send them out?