1. Sara K.S. Hanks March 11, 2011 at 3:07 am - Reply


    I think I saw this related to a different gospel principle (probably priesthood authority), but I immediately thought, “That would be a vast improvement over the Law of Chastity object lessons we’ve presently got.” The basic idea is that you bring in a “treasure chest” – a cooler or wooden box, whatever, along with a set of keys that are meant to open it. In terms of the Law of Chastity, the treasure chest and the stuff inside of it would represent sexual intimacy, and the set of keys might be labeled “Love,” “Agency,” “Maturity,” and “Marriage.” I’m sure you can put it together from that information: the lesson is that there’s a wonderful part of life that we get to enjoy when we have the appropriate keys to access it. It also gives plentiful opportunities to discuss sexuality in a positive and honest way, showing it as an expression of love and a matter of agency (ie that abuse is wicked). I know this analogy has its own flaws, mostly as it builds sex up to this impossible expectation that lots of us Mormon kids already have, but it’s a start.

    • Anonymous March 15, 2011 at 11:11 pm - Reply

      Sarah, I think you discount Nicole Hardy’s argument with the “treasure chest” metaphor. I think Nicole makes a very fair argument (if we have faith in her stated intentions). Her argument is that she has all of the “keys” to enjoy that illusive “treasure chest,” but she has been denied (by fate perhaps) that final key: marriage. The argument therefore gets summed up into the following questions: By having the other keys that you mentioned (i.e., love, agency, and maturity), can a single woman still enjoy the same “treasure” (sexually) that a married couple, with the same keys, would enjoy? And, would God hold that against her in the next life?

  2. Megan March 11, 2011 at 6:07 pm - Reply

    What I found very telling about the criticism directed towards Nicole Hardy was not so much the expected ‘she should not have done this’ commentary but the ‘she should not THINK this or FEEL this.’ The fact that Mormon women felt that it was reasonable to police the emotional experience of another woman is, I think, significant of how troubling the Mormon approach to female sexuality really is.

  3. Non American March 12, 2011 at 6:53 pm - Reply

    I have a question. Heather, are you active in the church again? I just listened to a podcastabout you and your husband leaving the church. The podcast ws excellent, by the way and I would be really interested to hear if you are active in the church again and how that came about.

    I found the “sex and the single Mormon” piece very moving.

    “The fact that Mormon women felt that it was reasonable to police the emotional experience of another woman is, I think, significant of how troubling the Mormon approach to female sexuality really is.” Excellently put Megan.

    Keep up the good work!

    • Heather March 31, 2011 at 4:15 am - Reply

      Non American, I think that was a different Heather! I am active in the church and always have been.

      I’ve participated in two MS podcasts: 143-146 (Raising Kids in a non-traditional LDS home) & 192-194 (Down Syndrome & Mormonism with Kathy Soper).

      • Ellen April 1, 2011 at 11:04 pm - Reply

        Oops, sorry Heather. It’s a case of mistaken identity!!

  4. Michael March 13, 2011 at 12:19 am - Reply

    Really loved the discussion, I especially enjoyed your comments on immigration. While I appreciate all of your comments, none of you offered any solutions?
    I think you can all admit that some type of immigration law is needed. Surely Joanna being in California understands that the mass illegal immigration in Ca is not sustainable. We have the highest state income tax in the nation, highest gas tax, highest sales tax and as a result of all the taxes what do we have? The highest unemployment and a state budget that is not sustainable and may be heading for bankruptcy. I am not saying illegal immigration is solely to blame, but most experts place it in the top 3 along with public worker pensions and the prison system.
    Taking this into consideration I think you will agree that a welcome mat approach is simply no longer an option.
    I would love to hear another podcast on the issue and hear some of your ideas for solutions instead of slinging arrows at those who are trying to come up with answers.
    It is a messy issue and while I do not believe that the AZ approach is the answer I also do not believe the status quo is an option.
    Every country has immigration laws. On my mission in Europe I had to carry my documents with me at all times and had to prove my legal status if asked by law enforcement. Why in this country is this considered to be akin to sticking people in Guantanamo Bay?

  5. Lstevekimball March 14, 2011 at 6:11 am - Reply

    Well hmm I think I would prefer to employ an illegal alien any day to a child molesting polygamist, yet Utah debates whether mexicans deserve rights while kiddy diddlers, their neighbors, have them, all is well in Zion….if we can just do something about the mexicans stealing the Provo valley $10 an hour jobs that need to be filled by kids making babies. AOK. What a place.

  6. Anonymous March 15, 2011 at 9:57 pm - Reply

    Just a few comments on Nicole Hardy’s piece in the New York Times. Does anyone else find it strange that a successful, 35-year-old woman with a job, house, and a car (mentioned with such pride) finds it necessary to receive subsidized, Planned Parenthood medical care from a stranger OB/GYN? I found her piece disgustingly over-the-top (especially the Brokeback Mountain/lesbian double-date/sex shop story). We get the point, Ms. Hardy: you’re trying to appeal to the largest liberal demographic that you can. Sure hope her shameless marketing campaign helped to sell her crappy poetry. Don’t get me wrong, I think it’s great that she highlighted the issues that Mormon women face in addressing their sexuality, but I just think her intentions for writing the piece were in a different place.

  7. Luckeyeth May 6, 2011 at 12:30 am - Reply

    Without even discussing labor flows within a free market, one might simply point out that when Latter Day Saints began settling in Utah, it was still a part of Mexico. We were the illegal immigrants, fleeing economic hardship and persecution. It’s ironic to see such hostility toward Mexicans in Utah and Arizona. Also, 2 Nephi 1:6-7: … there shall none come into this land save they shall be brought by the hand of the Lord. Wherefore, this land is consecrated unto him whom he shall bring… they shall never be brought down into captivity; if so, it shall be because of iniquity; for if iniquity shall abound cursed shall be the land for their sakes, but unto the righteous it shall be blessed forever.
    ¡Feliz Cinco de Mayo!

  8. Stormin Norman November 29, 2012 at 11:19 am - Reply

    Support for Illegal immigration is just another sign of a false “manmade Church”! LD$ inc. is taking a stance against the constitution and Christ Commandments and for law and commandment breakers and the criminal businessmen that hire them. This church is supporting the Marriots and slave labor mogols of the world!

Leave A Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.