Latter-day Saints Skinny Dipper's Forum
Welcome to the New LDS Skinny Dipper's Forum!
(View six year's of archives here.)

While this website is primarily for members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, or Mormons, who are interested in chaste, wholesome, recreational nudity, everyone is welcome to participate.
Welcome Guest! To enable all features please try to register or login.
4 Pages<1234>
Non-Official Official position
Jacob Offline
#21 Posted : Thursday, November 29, 2012 8:53:02 PM(UTC)
Rank: Telestial Member
Joined: 11/25/2012(UTC)
Posts: 18
Location: CA
Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
Mormondad wrote:
Finally this summer a quiet statement was posted on the church web site "clarifying" the stance that caffeinated sodas were not against the Word of Wisdom and that restriction was only limited to Coffee and Tea. This statement was apparently made due to the publicity from the presidential campaign and Mitt Romney. Dancing


Funny you would mention this. Just yesterday morning I was talking to my son about drinking coffee, he's had two bishops and a stake president tell him that decaf coffee is okay, and caffeine in soda and other drinks are okay, as long as the caffeine and coffee aren't in the same drink, it's okay to drink. Just a sign that times and mindsets are changing.
nude_explorer Offline
#22 Posted : Friday, November 30, 2012 12:26:44 AM(UTC)

Rank: Celestial Member
Joined: 11/26/2012(UTC)
Posts: 75
Location: Vernal UT
Thanks: 1 times
Was thanked: 17 time(s) in 16 post(s)
Ravenwarbird wrote:
I have searched pondered and prayed about cheese and have received the answer that cheese is not good for my body. Do I expect all of you to stop eating cheese now? No. If a GA said he does not each cheese would I expect members of the Church to stop eating cheese? Yes I am sure some would but hopefully none here. If the Church made an official statement that members are to stop eating cheese would I expect you to stop eating cheese? Yes, I think most of you would after asking about it in prayer.



A few years ago some do gooder group tried to sue a fast food restaurant claiming that the cheese in cheeseburgers had a habit forming drug in it.
This is absolutely true, cheese does in fact have a drug which naturally occurs in the culture process when making cheese, it is called Morphine.
The amount of morphine in cheese is so miniscule you would have to eat several hundred pounds to get any effect.
Ddoger Offline
#23 Posted : Friday, November 30, 2012 12:35:37 AM(UTC)
Rank: Telestial Member
Joined: 11/21/2012(UTC)
Posts: 116
Thanks: 15 times
Was thanked: 77 time(s) in 42 post(s)
Mormondad wrote:
rjmma wrote:
Thanks MD, started to type something similar. and it was awful. you did a great job representing some of my thoughts. How did you do that?


You know the saying about great minds… Thus you must have one awesome mind. Cool



Great minds think a like and fools seldom differ.
“Men are disturbed not by things but by the views which they take of them”. Epictetus
wildwooly Offline
#24 Posted : Friday, November 30, 2012 5:45:49 AM(UTC)
Rank: Telestial Member
Joined: 11/24/2012(UTC)
Posts: 67
Location: Kingwood,Texas
Was thanked: 4 time(s) in 4 post(s)
Angel I don,t drink coffee because I don,t like the taste and small and I don,t drink Coke Cola because it gives me heartburn.
Mr Moonella Offline
#25 Posted : Friday, November 30, 2012 6:54:46 AM(UTC)

Rank: Telestial Member
Joined: 11/22/2012(UTC)
Posts: 111
Location: England
Thanks: 11 times
Was thanked: 27 time(s) in 18 post(s)
Mormondad wrote:
I do believe it's significant in that the church has taken no official position on naturism, non-sexual nudity or social nudity. It is just as telling in that they did not point to the Law of Chastity as covering the issue but merely left it at no position.


So does anyone know whether the question was actually put to them by KUTV2 and that they said that they have no official stand.Brick wall
rjmma Offline
#26 Posted : Friday, November 30, 2012 9:17:37 AM(UTC)

Rank: Celestial Member
Joined: 11/20/2012(UTC)
Posts: 230
Location: Utah
Thanks: 16 times
Was thanked: 68 time(s) in 54 post(s)
Ddoger wrote:
Mormondad wrote:
rjmma wrote:
Thanks MD, started to type something similar. and it was awful. you did a great job representing some of my thoughts. How did you do that?


You know the saying about great minds… Thus you must have one awesome mind. Cool



Great minds think a like and fools seldom differ.


I suppose that it is the perspective of the viewer as to whether the minds in agreement are fools or wise.

On the other hand...

The caffein comparison does break down. It has been published in many places that the WofW only defines hot drinks as coffee and tea. It has been members looking for explanations as to why. So the official statement re-clarifies, but really doesn't add any more understanding.
Jacob Offline
#27 Posted : Friday, November 30, 2012 9:20:39 AM(UTC)
Rank: Telestial Member
Joined: 11/25/2012(UTC)
Posts: 18
Location: CA
Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
Mormondad Offline
#28 Posted : Friday, November 30, 2012 9:33:02 PM(UTC)

Rank: Exalted Millennial Member
Joined: 11/20/2012(UTC)
Posts: 870
Location: Utah
Thanks: 17 times
Was thanked: 252 time(s) in 157 post(s)
rjmma wrote:
The caffein comparison does break down. It has been published in many places that the WofW only defines hot drinks as coffee and tea. It has been members looking for explanations as to why. So the official statement re-clarifies, but really doesn't add any more understanding.


Well even if it has already been out there, for many members it had never been acknowledged as such. Until recently with the web site post many "extrapolated" the hot drinks definition into caffeinated drinks of all types (too bad they conveniently ignored hot chocolate which is both hot and caffeinated). Just another example of members applying their own definitions and then calling it church doctrine without anything supporting it.

From the KUTV story, you can assume that they were told that "there is no official position" or you can take the probably more realistic look as their question was met with silence and thus they placed the wording onto the church. I am not aware of any specific statement either way and I don't see any PR savvy person making any statement at all either way unless they were to come out clearly against it. However after my experience in examining the issue from the beginning (remember I am not like many here who had an innate desire to be nude or free of clothes but approached purely from an academic approach) I cannot fathom anyone who honestly examines the issue to ever claim it to be overtly wrong, sinful or evil. As I've stated before there are pitfalls of coming out openly endorsing it from the churches perspective and thus I fully expect silence to be the answer anyone will ever get on the matter from anyone in a senior leadership role of the church.
"Modesty died when clothes were born."
---Mark Twain
Captain Curmudgeon Offline
#29 Posted : Saturday, December 1, 2012 10:14:34 AM(UTC)

Rank: Exalted Millennial Member
Joined: 11/20/2012(UTC)
Posts: 9
Location: SLC UT
I have a vague memory of someone either here at ldssdf or maybe the old, secret ldssdc mailing list tracking down the Church President someplace in Heber and asking him about naturism.
Ddoger Offline
#30 Posted : Saturday, December 1, 2012 1:13:33 PM(UTC)
Rank: Telestial Member
Joined: 11/21/2012(UTC)
Posts: 116
Thanks: 15 times
Was thanked: 77 time(s) in 42 post(s)
I think that was Nude Explorers wife.
“Men are disturbed not by things but by the views which they take of them”. Epictetus
Ordinary Joseph Offline
#31 Posted : Saturday, December 1, 2012 2:50:23 PM(UTC)

Rank: Telestial Member
Joined: 11/20/2012(UTC)
Posts: 43
Thanks: 41 times
Was thanked: 9 time(s) in 6 post(s)
Ddoger wrote:
I think that was Nude Explorers wife.
Buried in this topic.
Mormondad Offline
#32 Posted : Saturday, December 1, 2012 8:14:18 PM(UTC)

Rank: Exalted Millennial Member
Joined: 11/20/2012(UTC)
Posts: 870
Location: Utah
Thanks: 17 times
Was thanked: 252 time(s) in 157 post(s)
There's been a couple who have stated that or something similar. While some view naturism as a lifestyle others view it as a philosophy and then you have some who don't care what it is only that they can be free of clothing. Personally I see it to some degree as a bit of a philosophy and not so much a lifestyle. Then again perhaps it just doesn't matter as nudity is just a fact of life and not necessarily anything else.
"Modesty died when clothes were born."
---Mark Twain
Roamer Offline
#33 Posted : Friday, December 28, 2012 1:28:49 AM(UTC)
Rank: Terrestrial Member
Joined: 12/27/2012(UTC)
Posts: 414
Thanks: 40 times
Was thanked: 80 time(s) in 63 post(s)
Mr Moonella wrote:
That's a warning well worth remembering. So basically

1) If it freaks your spouse out it could mess up your marriage, obviously.
2) Even though there's no official church position, it could still get you excommunicated, sadly but perhaps unsurprisingly.
3) You can be convicted of something which isn't a crime and which is normal in many homes. Which is crazy. Surely a higher court would overturn that!


It should be noted that in Utah it now is a crime for an adult to be naked in the company of a minor, regardless of context or relationship to the "victim" IIRC.

The severity of the offense varies depending on the age(I think they have one tier for 13 and under, and another for 14 to 18), and it has been discussed here previously so if you dig enough, it can be found.
Roamer Offline
#34 Posted : Friday, December 28, 2012 1:48:18 AM(UTC)
Rank: Terrestrial Member
Joined: 12/27/2012(UTC)
Posts: 414
Thanks: 40 times
Was thanked: 80 time(s) in 63 post(s)
Ordinary Joseph wrote:
Ddoger wrote:
I think that was Nude Explorers wife.
Buried in this topic.


To be fair to President Monson, he was bushwhacked on the subject and had little to no information on the subject, and said "could" not "would" in regards to losing reccomends or even their membership over it in his off-the-cuff response while being taken off guard on the subject. And even with that statement he was correct, people have lost their reccomends and membership over it. Now as to whether that is the correct policy, that is another matter.

But I hold with MD on this, with society being the way it is, the First Presidency(and by extension, the Church as a whole) cannot currently endorse it. Even if it is closer to the "right way" of doing things, because of everything else that would happen in association with that endorsement happening. Far more harm would come of it than any help it would provide to the membership as a whole.

The only good news for Mormon Naturists is that the First Presidency remains stoicly neutral on the matter, which tends to say that their deliberations on the matter have either been inconclusive so far, or their conclusions were much the same as what we came up with here. In either case, no news from SLC on this topic is good news, as I can't imagine a whole lot of a downside for the church coming out against Naturism if that was their final conclusion(when speaking of the faith as a whole).
zorro Offline
#35 Posted : Wednesday, July 24, 2013 11:33:12 PM(UTC)
Rank: Telestial Member
Joined: 2/11/2013(UTC)
Posts: 25
Location: las vegas nev.
Was thanked: 4 time(s) in 2 post(s)
in the 80's while in collage my bishop called me in to show me a message from the first presidency stating that nudity in art was up to the mind and heart of the artist, my bishop explaining that if the thouht and heart are pure there is no sin. i was told by a byu employee that they used to offer nude classes on campus till members (not ga's) complained so the classes where moved off campus.i was told acouple of weeks ago that the classes still are held for advanced students. yet another utah collage a couple of years concluded that they could have nude drawing calsses but that they could not use students from the collage as models.
Mormondad Offline
#36 Posted : Monday, August 5, 2013 6:13:44 PM(UTC)

Rank: Exalted Millennial Member
Joined: 11/20/2012(UTC)
Posts: 870
Location: Utah
Thanks: 17 times
Was thanked: 252 time(s) in 157 post(s)
zorro wrote:
in the 80's while in collage my bishop called me in to show me a message from the first presidency stating that nudity in art was up to the mind and heart of the artist, my bishop explaining that if the thouht and heart are pure there is no sin.


You didn't by chance get a copy of that letter did you?
"Modesty died when clothes were born."
---Mark Twain
Ordinary Joseph Offline
#37 Posted : Friday, August 23, 2013 3:58:07 PM(UTC)

Rank: Telestial Member
Joined: 11/20/2012(UTC)
Posts: 43
Thanks: 41 times
Was thanked: 9 time(s) in 6 post(s)
Mormondad wrote:
While some view naturism as a lifestyle others view it as a philosophy and then you have some who don't care what it is only that they can be free of clothing.
True enough, MD.

But within Mormon Naturists, I think a more interesting (or vital) distinction is between what I'd call 13th Article of Faith Mormon Naturists and Holy Ghost Mormon Naturists.

LDSSDF tends to 13th Article of Faith and the older LDSSDC tends to Holy Ghost, which is one of the reasons LDSSDC seems to be vanishing.
Frontiersman Offline
#38 Posted : Saturday, August 24, 2013 12:14:09 PM(UTC)

Rank: Terrestrial Member
Joined: 11/20/2012(UTC)
Posts: 349
Location: Jefferson/California
Thanks: 133 times
Was thanked: 43 time(s) in 36 post(s)
What would be the definition of a Holy Ghost Mormon Naturist? And why would that sort of Mormon Naturist be disappearing, at least in comparison to 13th Article of Faith Mormon Naturists?
De oppresso liber
Frontiersman Offline
#39 Posted : Monday, September 16, 2013 1:39:22 AM(UTC)

Rank: Terrestrial Member
Joined: 11/20/2012(UTC)
Posts: 349
Location: Jefferson/California
Thanks: 133 times
Was thanked: 43 time(s) in 36 post(s)
While reading a talk from the BYU speeches website from the President of BYU I came across this statement
Quote:
When we understand that the body is a temple, we will not deface it. When we understand the sacredness of the body, we will understand the importance of modest dress. We will understand the incongruity of individuals stripping to the waist and painting their faces and bodies at football games.
As many people get their idea of absolute certainty from what is promulgated at BYU I figured that this thread would be the most appropriate for words from BYU's President. Now you know what is modest and what is incongruous.
De oppresso liber
Mormondad Offline
#40 Posted : Friday, September 20, 2013 10:57:25 PM(UTC)

Rank: Exalted Millennial Member
Joined: 11/20/2012(UTC)
Posts: 870
Location: Utah
Thanks: 17 times
Was thanked: 252 time(s) in 157 post(s)
Frontiersman wrote:
While reading a talk from the BYU speeches website from the President of BYU I came across this statement
Quote:
When we understand that the body is a temple, we will not deface it. When we understand the sacredness of the body, we will understand the importance of modest dress. We will understand the incongruity of individuals stripping to the waist and painting their faces and bodies at football games.
As many people get their idea of absolute certainty from what is promulgated at BYU I figured that this thread would be the most appropriate for words from BYU's President. Now you know what is modest and what is incongruous.


Interesting opinion from the President of BYU. Unfortunately far too many fail to understand that there is no "doctrine' in this statement but only opinion base upon his beliefs and views.
"Modesty died when clothes were born."
---Mark Twain
Users browsing this topic
Guest (3)
4 Pages<1234>
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

SoClean Theme By Jaben Cargman (Tiny Gecko)
Powered by YAF 1.9.5 RC1 | YAF © 2003-2010, Yet Another Forum.NET
This page was generated in 0.107 seconds.