I always think corrupting people is a thankless job, but every now and then I get a little recognition.

Our pastor had a great message saying that we don’t have the right to condemn or judge others who don’t believe the same way as we do. (That doesn’t mean, however, that I can’t or won’t share my faith).

Since women wearing traditional clothing (going topless) is not expressly addressed as a sin in the Bible, then I’d say it wasn’t a problem for the women to wear their traditional garb to the ceremony.

Women are told to be modest in the Bible, but it seems that modesty is established by the culture of which you are a part. I guess my own modesty comes down to personal conviction. And that is the same for others too. But, you have to be aware of that is socially acceptable, ie: going topless the pool where it is not socially acceptable for women to go topless.

Then there is always the question of where do you draw the line?

Great minds think alike as they say (far too often) but I must say that your proposal is much more immodest than mine. It’s interesting to read about other cultures’ attitudes toward nudity. What’s really odd to me is that I ever believed in an absolute standard of modesty (e.g. female nipples should remain clothed at all times).

I talked about how culture defines what constitutes modesty in my post topless on the beach.

Plus I have a post with the same title: An Immodest Proposal.

I would contend that its all gray area. Every time that I try to come up with a good, clean definition of what is modest, I always think of some reason that the definition doesn’t work.

Even intent has problems. A woman in my office used to work in a casino managing their pool. Quite often she would have to tell European tourists that it’s not OK to go to the pool with their obviously pubescent daughters going topless. They had no intent to be provocative, but the scene is going to create problems here in the U.S. In a word, their behavior is immodest.

If you’re saying that God wouldn’t condemn them because they had right intentions, I guess that makes sense. But that just means that God doesn’t really support any particular culture’s standard of dress.

Intent also has shades of gray. Does wanting to look good to the opposite sex count as slightly immodest? How sexy can I intend to look before it becomes immodest?

I had a longer comment, but it just doesn’t come out right. And, as always, there’s a lot of grey area.

I give up. I’ve been trying to write this comment for more than an hour, but work keeps getting in the way.

The force fed thought that humanity is fallen is exactly what I wish my children could avoid. I don’t want them to be burdened by artificial shame in the name of keeping them faithful.

Therefore if that man repenteth not, and remaineth and dieth an enemy to God, the demands of divine justice do awaken his immortal soul to a lively sense of his own guilt, which doth cause him to shrink from the presence of the Lord, and doth fill his breast with guilt, and pain, and anguish, which is like an unquenchable fire, whose flame ascendeth up forever and ever. (Mosiah 2:38)

Ugly. If you look at that scripture from the perspective which sees God as created in the image of man, it’s heartbreaking to think of all the people who have struggled under religion induced shame.

Kullervo,

Maybe the LDS church will catch up to the present sensibilities in about 40-50 years when the 30-somethings come to power.

The power of religion is the degree to which it convinces you of its needfulness. There are no more needful people than those who believe that only an omnipotent god is sufficient to save them.

This is what I think is the answer to your observation about western religious self-loathing.