No licking!
I have family in Utah and there’s a pretty common joke in this vein.
Why do you always invite two Mormons to a party?
Because if you only invite one they will drink all your beer.
Jews don’t recognize Jesus.
Protestants don’t recognize the Pope.
Mormons don’t recognize each other in wendover
Every Mormon I’ve ever met is very serious about walking the talk, alone or not. They’re probably more serious about following the rules of their religion than any other religion. Well, them and Muslims, but Mormons seem happier doing it.
They’re serious about following the rules because their entire social and community structure stresses conformity. If you break the norms of the faith there are serious repercussions and you can lose your entire family, community, and support structure. When they’re alone with others who aren’t of the faith they are definitely far more lax. I’ve drank beer and even had chocolate with Mormons before lol.
“[…] even had chocolate with Mormons […]”?
Uh. There is absolutely nothing in the Mormon Word of Wisdom that says anything about chocolate. There isn’t even anything about caffeine. The phrase used is “hot drinks”, which has been interpreted by the Mor(m)on prophets to mean specifically coffee and tea (but not herbal tea). A particularly zealous bishop or stake president might counsel against caffeine consumption, but AFAIK they aren’t going to prevent you from going to a Mormon temple if you chug a case of Red Bull and Bawls every single day.
Source: raised Mormon, was active for 25-ish years, former missionary.
former missionary.
Bit of an aside but I love fucking with (ex)-you guys. I have a stack of pamphlets from The Church of the SubGenius by my door and am well practiced in the religious dogma contained within, I turn the tables on em real quick and talk about our great guru J. R. “Bob” Dobbs as long as I can hold them while they get visibly annoyed lmao. See how they like it for a change!
I used to have a problem with jehovas witnesses waking me up regularly because I kept a night schedule. Like, every week or two, I’d be woken up in the middle of my sleep cycle by them.
Politely informed them I was solidly not religious, nor did I have any interest in religion at all.
They came back.
Asked them to remove me from their circuit.
They came back.
Started getting mildly rude, cutting them off and asking them to not knock on my door again.
They came back.
I answered the door in nothing but boxers and told them I don’t care about their zombie Jesus.
Sweet uninterrupted sleep from then on.
Worked for a company that was entirely JWs, some of the most genuinely nice people I ever met, but knowing the whole process behind the scenes and how constrictive the lifestyle is, it was always off putting.
I was never witnessed to other than just general inquiry to get to know me in passing by coworkers. But their doctrine basically states that if I’m not a JW, I’m a non-person. I don’t know how many of them believe it, but still.
They all have designated zones to do their “service” so if you refuse they’ll still come back because they believe their ticket into heaven is to convince you what they say is true.
If anyone else who reads this ever has problems with them coming to their door, best way to get them to take you off their list is say “I’ve already been excommunicated from another kingdom hall in (insert town from 2hr+ away)”
“I’ve already been excommunicated from another kingdom hall in (insert town from 2hr+ away)”
Well, there’s the trick. I don’t think I could say those words without breaking. I’d be demanding a shrubbery before I could stop myself.
The way it was always explained to me was anything containing even a small amount of caffeine was problematic. I appreciate you correcting me on this.
Yeah… unfortunately, confusion about this particular subject exists because members often look for the underlying justification on things and then extrapolate from there.
(I’m going to paraphrase and shorten things a lot here so we don’t have to dive into definitions and technicalities. Bear with me.)
The doctrine brought forth about this is what’s referred to as “The Word of Wisdom,” which was a short outline of what things were deemed as “harmful” or otherwise “unsuitable” for the body. The idea being that the Lord was promising to people that if they didn’t ingest these things, they would live a healthier life as a result. “Hot drinks” was mentioned and clarified a century later to mean “tea and coffee.” Furthermore, “tea” refers to black and green tea, and not necessarily herbal tea.
People, by nature, want to understand the “why” behind things. You also have people who want to understand where the line begins and ends so they can tiptoe it. Enter the rumor that since the “hot drinks” referred to “tea and coffee,” they both have not-so-insignificant amounts of caffeine in them. Obviously that must mean drinks like Coca-Cola and Pepsi, plus foods such as chocolate, must also be in violation of this, right?
Well, the issue with that is people think they’re applying “the spirit of the law” (meaning the larger picture behind it) when they’re actually applying “the word of the law” (taken at face value). The idea behind the Word of Wisdom is to take care of your body by having a balanced diet and not eating too much of a particular thing. Certain items were called out explicitly; if caffeine were the true issue, then it would’ve been called out instead. But it wasn’t, and there have been some clarifications to emphasize that caffeine itself is not the explicit reason behind it. (However the idea of “addiction” could extend to caffeine if someone were to consume large amounts of it regularly, but addiction or dependency can occur even to things like Tylenol when too much is consumed, so targeting it specifically is silly.)
So in short, it’s a mixture of misunderstanding and overzealous practice. Caffeine is perfectly fine. Just like anything else: make sure you’re not consuming too much of it.
I really cannot blame anyone for the confusion because a lot of this comes from the LDS Church itself and their often confusing clarifications of their positions. Like with caffeine specifically they have a long history of forbidding its use and then suddenly they reinterpreted it the way you’re suggesting. I’d say that’s fairly atypical for most religions nowadays and it’s a unique aspect of the LDS church that their interpretations are fluid like that.
The alternative for most other religions in the US is just that they never get specific and so most members hold conflicting views and interpretations. Both of the techniques I find very odd since you’d think that these differences would have faith based answers, but instead appear almost bureaucratic in nature
Like with caffeine specifically they have a long history of forbidding its use and then suddenly they reinterpreted it the way you’re suggesting.
I had to think about this. I can’t seem to find any articles in a quick search where church leaders (a Prophet or Apostle) explicitly forbade its use. I have, however, found many excerpts where leaders who do not sit at the head (Quorum of the Seventy, BIshop, etc) have made statements warning against it or even flat out saying that members should not ingest it.
Given the structure and lack of corrective statements coming from above, I would attribute the confusion to local and regional leaders being overzealous by including caffeine explicitly in their teachings. Some have worded things in a manner I would find accurate, such as “high-dose caffeinated energy drinks” or “excessive soda consumption which results in high caffeine and sugar intake.” Others though explicitly call out caffeine as an “evil,” describing experiences with caffeine withdrawals or members deciding to not ingest alcohol, nicotine, nor caffeine. These mentions seem to have drummed up confusion primarily in the 80s (a lot of “Letter to the Editor” publications from this period seem to have been back-and-forth arguments among members, lol).
Initially I didn’t think the history is as “long” as you claimed, but then I realized that the 80s was just forty years ago, and with some results of the topic dating as far back as the 70s, it would mean it’s been an intra-member debate for almost half a century. And half a century is practically a lifetime 😖
In my experience, a lot of “devoutly” religious people are like this.
I grew up Independent Fundamental Baptist (westboro, but less vocally homophobic) and my dad told me a few years ago he secretly kept a stash of alcohol in the garage while he was quite aggressively teaching that the Bible expressly forbade consumption of alcohol that could get you drunk because of a long argument that basically amounts to “Paul said so.” (The proper response to that is “fuck Paul”, obv. Paul was an asshat.)
You can twist anything into anything if you try hard enough, and they’re really good at it.
While there must certainly be some devout Muslims who try their best to keep the “rules”, as I’d expect in any group, a lot of Muslims are not so different frombthe rest of us non-Muslims.
My coworker is a former Muslim who had to leave his home country due to persecution when he became a Christian. Here, he’s made Muslim friends who regularly invite him over for dinner and they serve… Pork. They say because he is not a Muslim, they respect that and don’t force him to eat halal. But why does not forcing him to eat halal equate to them eating pork?
They are genuinely his friends, but he is also their “excuse” to break halal.
When I was in Dubai for work it was explained to me that while it is prohibited to drink alcohol for Muslims under normal situations, they are allowed to have alcohol as part of business meetings/dinners since they court an international audience for various business prospects which is crucial for their economic future as a county.
Supposedly, that’s why everyone has a “business”, and you always see 2 bros in white robes chillin at a restaurant having drinks for a “meeting”.
LOL, that’s funny. They’re definitely making an excuse to eat pork.
The Muslims I know are pretty strict about following the commandments. Of course nobody’s perfect, but they pray 5 times per day, take their prayer rug to work, and follow their dietary restrictions. Of course I’m not around them all the time though, that’s just what I’ve seen.
The person who is the most serious about it that I know isn’t Arabic or Persian. He’s an African American living in the American South, and he’s very serious about his religion. The Muslims I know that seem the most relaxed about it are immigrants from Iran. Several of their first generation American kids are atheists.
I live in Malaysia, and Islam is the dominant religion here. Yet every store has a “haram corner” where they sell alcohol and pork, and some smaller supermarkets are even completely non-halal by default.
And while I haven’t seen a muslim eating pork, I had a few beers with some on several occasions. And I haven’t seen or heard anyone praying, with the exception for Malacca city, which is apparently a bit of a stricter area.
I guess every religion old enough has such kind of loopholes. I know from Roman Catholic that there can be made up so many exceptions that the 40 days of lent before Easter books down to a few days of actually fasting. No lent if you’re travelling (commute to work counts), no lent if you have guests, and of course no lent if you are a guest somewhere else. And Sunday is exempt from lent anyways.
How many Mormons have you met?
It seemed we’d talk to a new pair every weekend when I was a kid. The visits got shorter when he was watering the garden.
The ones I met were upset I photographed their ID.
it can’t possibly be that you’re more exposed to Mormons, right
More exposed to them than who? Idk what you’re trying to imply.
than you are to Muslims
Ah, gotcha. No, I know more Muslims than Mormons.
sure buddy, like your old muslim girlfriend from canada in the 80s. we get ya.
K
ok… so where do you meet around 20 Mormons but even more Muslims?
Waiting in line at your mom’s house.
That was the joke about Baptists in my hometown. It was impossible to only invite one since everyone knew everyone’s families.
They need a friend to jump on the bed
You need someone else to shake the glass
Can they buttchug it?
How long should they let it soak?
They could also use the poophole loophole.
A tampon soaked in Vodka and inserted anally gets you drunk fast.
At least that’s what a friend told me.How gaped does your ass have to be to easily insert a soaked tampon.
Are your dumps really smaller than a tampon? If they aren’t, why do you think your hole would need to be especially gaped?
I looked it up and I get it now. I assumed O.B. style tampon with no applicator, which would be difficult to insert. The info I found shows the soaking of the tampon inside the applicator, which makes a lot more sense.
As soon as you asked your initial question I too was imagining someone trying to fit a fully expanded tampon inside them … which is a though I wish I hadn’t
JD Vance on the stump in Utah: “Tim Walz wants to get your kids drunk with ass tampons”
I’ve heard it called God’s blind spot before but poophole loophole is a great phrase
The poophole loophole usually means something different. They say anal sex doesn’t count as “losing your virginity.” So they can have all the premarital sex they want, as long as it’s in the pooper.
Why not both?
Okay. I can’t tell if you’re serious, but if that’s true, how does that work medically?
Don’t liquids get absorbed through the intestines? Can you even stick something up your butt far enough to reach your intestines?
Additionally to what others have said it’s also quite dangerous. You can drink a fatal amount of alcohol but your body will generally puke before it absorbs enough to kill you.
Using this method (boofing), you don’t have that defense, it’s absorbed too quickly and your body doesn’t generally shit itself to expel poison.
It’s capillary action. It just rams straight into your bloodstream, no dilution or waiting to go through stomach. It’s fast and effective.
Plus the excitement of risking an overdose!
So, as it doesn’t go through the stomach, do you not puke if you’re experiencing alcohol poisoning?
I’m sure you’d still puke as it’s nausea that makes you vomit not alcohol sitting in your stomach.
Alcohol gets absorbed by mucus membrane much faster than by going through your digestive tract. And your anus is lined with mucus membrane.
It was a craze a decade or so ago where I live, cause teenagers did that to get drunk without having their breath smell of alcohol, and some of them ended up in the ER.It was also a crazy in the US. They called it butt chugging. It was funny to hear politicians talk about how we needed to do something about butt chugging
Alcohol gets absorbed by mucus membrane
Cue Eyeball Paul
cause teenagers did that to get drunk without having their breath smell of alcohol
Did they ever realize that’s not how that works?
Oh but it is. Not familliar with the phrase “boofing,” are you? Works for more than just booze, too, all kinds of things can become a suppository and affect your brain if you ignore the doctors warning you it could kill you, or listen to the ones saying “here’s some butt pills.”
I’m very familiar. That’s why I know it won’t keep the smell of alcohol off your breath. The alcohol goes to the blood, and a byproduct goes to the lungs which is exhaled. You can’t defeat a breathalyzer by shoving booze up your ass.
Ooohhh I see what you mean, my mistake! I’m used to people saying buttchugging itself is a myth and doesn’t work, so I misunderstood!
Colon is part of your large intestine.
You could skip the tampon and just boof it.
I’ll bet you could even get a Supreme Court justice to help with that maneuver.
Its called…soaking…don’t Google that
We know.
I wouldn’t want to be the guy standing in front of the Throne of God and saying “But technically…”
Don’t worry there are a whole lot of jewish people that live inside a fishing line perimeter that are going to have to explain that whole racket before you get your chance to talk about soaking.
For the downvoters:
More than 200 cities around the world are partially encircled by an eruv.
Partially?
Yeah, they don’t usually encompass the whole city, just the Jewish communities. Eruvs aren’t really necessary if you aren’t following Halacha (Jewish custom/religious law). Plus it’s a big deal if it’s broken, and it’s less likely to be broken if it’s smaller and easier to maintain.
In which case the city is not “partially encircled”, but “parts of the city are encircled”. Makes much more sense now.
What I find mad about this is that the Jesus they claim to follow (and totally not Joseph Smith who they really follow) drank wine and commanded His followers to do so
Growing up Mormon in the 80s (I got better!), they insisted to us kids that it was just grape juice, and for adults they simply put a social stigma on asking too many questions, or any uncomfortable questions.
If there is a theological principal in play it’s that they view their prophets as still able to receive Bible-level revelations, and if their non-trinitarian God committee tells Joseph Smith that wine is bad now, then wine is bad now. If human nature then results in believers feeling like sinners who need to make it up to their community and their church leaders, then oh so sad, but it can result in the Lord’s work being done.
In general Mormon theology is rather literal and childlike, only getting complicated when trying to work around some established Christian doctrine that no new book overrides (yet!). It’s almost like some provincial huckster was making it up as he went along…
Yeah, just like how black people were bad and the “children of Ham” or whatever. After the Civil Rights Movement, Morman God mysteriously changed his mind and said “black people are ok now”.
That didn’t happen until the Department of Education in the Carter administration started talking about whether students at BYU should be getting federal grants and loans, and I believe the NCAA was making some noise as well.
Nah
This is the type of thinking that could be the next soaking or jump jumping at BYU.
That’s the joke.
it’s called soaking and they already know about it lol
