Woman Pleads Not Guilty in Lawn Case

Why are you all surprised?!! Police brutality happens ALL THE TIME! There is no respect for humanity in this society anymore - not for people of color, senior citizens, or the poor! WAKE UP PEOPLE.

If this happened to this lady, imagine how the cops will treat YOU! If you think this is an isolated incident think again.

WHO THE HELL CARES?!?!??!?!?!?!

This is Utah, where sex for anything but procreation is a sin . . .they have to obsess about something.

The people whose property values are falling because they now live next to an ugly-ass piece of property, that's who.

You are clearly someone who's never been in a situation like that.

This is Utah, where sex for anything but procreation is a sin . . .they have to obsess about something.

Right... Again, it's sad that people can be derogatory and rude towards the population of an entire state but speak out against persecution of any other group.

Wherever you got your information, it's wrong.

Wherever you got your information, it's wrong.

I was Mormon for ten years. LOL

Well then you must not remember correctly!

Well then you must not remember correctly!

How about you dish on your credentials? I received my endowments at the Washington Temple in July of 1986.

Well, I've certainly never heard about "sex any purpose other than procreation" being a sin... and I consider myself a pretty "mainstream" Mormon... raised in Utah.

May I suggest you take up a serious study of Mormon doctrine. Start by actually reading the Doctrine and Covenants and the read Mormon Doctrine. Unless you haven't actually read the Book of Mormon yet, start there. I'm not going to waste anymore time on this, but will give you a couple of things to think about:

Former Latter-Day Saints President Spencer W. Kimball has written: "The union of the sexes, husband and wife (and only husband and wife), was for the principal purpose of bringing children into the world. Sexual experiences were never intended by the Lord to be a mere plaything or merely to satisfy passions and lusts." He continues, "There are some people who have said that behind the bedroom doors anything goes. That is not true and the Lord would not condone it." Beliefnet

also . . .

An early LDS apostle, Parley P. Pratt, noted that the desires and feelings associated with procreation are not evil, but are ordained of God for sacred purposes:

The fact is, God made man, male and female; he planted in their bosoms those affections which are calculated to promote their happiness and union. That by that union they might fulfill the first and great commandment…"To multiply and replenish the earth, and subdue it."

from Lightplanet

I think that is pretty clear . .

I must have missed the "serious study" of Mormon doctrine in my 25 years as a member of the church and 2 years service as a full-time missionary.

I'm not going to debate doctrine here, since either of us could probably find a quote from just about anywhere to support just about any claim for anything, if inserted in the right context.

By the way, Mormon Doctrine is not Mormon doctrine. While it gets many things right, other issues are personal beliefs of Bruce R. McConkie.

...uhm, so wait... is Gwenny wrong? Can we all trot out some LDS facts and frictions?

I must have missed the "serious study" of Mormon doctrine in my 25 years as a member of the church and 2 years service as a full-time missionary.

Have you read D&C cover to cover? Have you read Mormon Doctrine? Honestly, did you EVER truly read the entire BoM? I converted at age 21. By age 25 I had read it all. I was constantly appalled that no one else had read any of it. So, tell me, HONESTLY, have you actually read any of those books?

I'm not going to debate doctrine here, since either of us could probably find a quote from just about anywhere to support just about any claim for anything, if inserted in the right context.

*I* could. I'm be interested to see what you could come up with that shows the Mormon belief is that sex is for anything beyond procreation and that the misuse of this "power" for your personal pleasure is a sin. I did a pretty thorough research on it to come up with those quotes, my own books on the LDS belief system were at home and I was at work. And you notice I only quoted sources "friendly" to your religion, which meant more work. LOL

By the way, Mormon Doctrine is not Mormon doctrine. While it gets many things right, other issues are personal beliefs of Bruce R. McConkie.

Was that an issue he "got wrong"? In fact, although it might be "personal beliefs" of the general authority, the current edition was released after changes were made under the guidance of Spencer W Kimball. the prophet at that time.

You know, I was first made aware of this doctrine of procreation by my bishop in N Carolina. And, as you know, bishops rule by the authority and guidance of God and a member is supposed to obey a bishop, even when the bishop's commandments run counter to the person's own opinions, or risk excommunication. Are you saying the bishop lied to me? Or that it was "just his opinion". Are you saying that I could have been excommunicated for this bishop's OPINION?

Heh! Well, that, among a myriad of other reasons, is why I am no longer LDS. Of course, the MAIN reason is because I was excommunicated for being pregnant by a high priest (who was not excommunicated because "he isn't pregnant and no one will ever know he sinned"). LOL What a freaking joke. He abandoned me the night before the wedding, one week pregnant. Then came back two years later and kidnapped my daughter with the help of members who had wormed their way back into my life and attempted to use my grief stricken state to get my other children away from me. I hold a great deal of anger . . .even hatred . . .for the Church and all the vile corrupt things it stands for.

Spooky:

Can we all trot out some LDS facts and frictions?

Spoken like a man who has them all collected in a file. LOL My favorite subject is polygamy and the hypocrisy about it. I was just reading that the current authorities have declared that the Church no longer practices polygamy, even where it is legal, that is it contrary to the teachings of God. ROFL I guess even the Prophets don't bother to read Doctrine and Covenants anymore.

Gwenny,

I thought I made it clear I do not want to debate. Bible-bashing is useless in any forum, the internet especially. The things that have happened to you are certainly unfortunate. That does not change the fact that my belief in the church is based on faith.

This isn't blind faith, because I have read the Book of Mormon cover to cover and close to all of the Doctrine and Covenants (I tend to study more than ready straight through, which means a lot of skipping around).

My faith continues in spite of "quotes" that may seem to challenge what a person would naturally think is right, such quotes can be interpreted in a million ways, and because my belief is not based around having an answer to everything, it's based on believing my current sum of understanding of the teachings of the church to be true.

I have known many Bishops, Stake Presidents, Mission Presidents, etc. in my time. Some of them were better people than others. However, I have not known any that would do the things you have had happened to you. This is not to say they don't exist, but rather, that your experience is not representative in any way of the church in general.

To directly address the quotes you gave earlier, while they say that we shouldn't merely satisfy "passions and lusts", I don't believe they support your premise, which was that procreation is the only purpose for sex. I have heard the Kimball quote before.

I thought I made it clear I do not want to debate.

The solution is SO incredibly easy. Don't reply. :D

Bible-bashing is useless in any forum, the internet especially.

Um, feel free to point to ONE statement of mine that could be construed as "bible-bashing". Seriously, dude, I didn't mention the Bible ONCE. Go ahead, read back. I didn't even BASH Mormon scripture. I was discussing the doctrine of the LDS church about sex . . . or, as they call it, "procreation". (Interestingly, just the fact that it is always called "procreation"--the act of reproducing--is a clue.

That does not change the fact that my belief in the church is based on faith.

Good for you. I'm not saying you shouldn't continue to have faith. Hell, I didn't even start this, you did. My hatred of the LDS is based on life experience. I hope you never have to face the horrors I faced at the hands of Mormons and you can maintain your faith.

My faith continues in spite of "quotes" that may seem to challenge what a person would naturally think is right

You feel this is some sort of . . . test? Wow, I'm getting better. I wasn't even trying. Although, I have to say if you feel that someone quoting the general authorities to show that sex is considered only for procreation is a challenge to your faith, I have great fears should anyone ever ACTUALLY try to challenge you.

To directly address the quotes you gave earlier, while they say that we shouldn't merely satisfy "passions and lusts", I don't believe they support your premise, which was that procreation is the only purpose for sex.

How, exactly would you interpret that DIRECT QUOTE from a former PROPHET?

"The union of the sexes, husband and wife (and only husband and wife), was for the principal purpose of bringing children into the world. Sexual experiences were never intended by the Lord to be a mere plaything or merely to satisfy passions and lusts."

The bishop I mentioned above took a really hard line. He and his wife, and he said this in Sunday School, ONLY had sex when she was fertile and with the intention of getting her pregnant--he mentioned the section in the Law, but I have to head to work and can't look up the reference for you in the OT. Others interpret it more loosely, so that couples can have sex any time, but they should be thinking about procreating and not recreating. LOL

So, if you don't want to debate, don't reply. If you do reply, please interpret Kimball's statement for me in your words.

- I can easily reply without debating... since when is every reply a debate? If you need me to make it more clear what I mean - I don't want to throw quotes and scriptures back and forth.

- I didn't say you mentioned the bible -- sorry for using what I thought was an easy to understand term. By "Bible-bash" I mean what I said above - throwing quotes and scriptures back and forth.

- I never said I thought this was a test, I only offered an explanation of why I don't think your anecdotes, and interpretations of quotes mean anything for me.

- Please remember that I said I was a missionary for 2 years. If that wasn't a challenge to my faith, I am not sure what would count as one.

- As for your bishop, he was wrong. Like I said, I'm sure he could find scripture and quotes to back up his point, but anyone could do that, and it doesn't really prove anything. I don't even care what OT reference or D&C reference he used to support that. The thousands of LDS members I know, are all aware of the same scriptures and do not believe that is the interpretation of any of them. (Except OT, which very well may say that, but is applicable to a different people in a different time).

I can easily reply without debating... since when is every reply a debate? If you need me to make it more clear what I mean - I don't want to throw quotes and scriptures back and forth.

From Merriam Webster Online

Main Entry: 1 de·bate
Pronunciation: di-'bAt, dE-
Function: noun
: a contention by words or arguments: as a : the formal discussion of a motion before a deliberative body according to the rules of parliamentary procedure b : a regulated discussion of a proposition between two matched sides

I see nothing here that mentions quotes and scriptures. :D Debate is to argue different point of views, supporting it with persuasive arguments. However, you might be correct. *I* am debating, you are merely arguing. LOL However, you continue to invest time in it, even though you claim you don't want to . . what's up with that?

I didn't say you mentioned the bible -- sorry for using what I thought was an easy to understand term. By "Bible-bash" I mean what I said above - throwing quotes and scriptures back and forth.

LOL It apparently is not, as I took it to mean, and I think most skeptics here would take it to mean, attacking the Bible. Apparently, the most common meaning, however, is:

Bible-bashing
noun

1. derog, colloq Enthusiastic evangelical Christian preaching, especially in which the preacher thumps or brandishes a Bible.

In either case, a Bible is involved and I never included any real scriptures, only quotes by men in authority in the LDS church.

I never said I thought this was a test, I only offered an explanation of why I don't think your anecdotes, and interpretations of quotes mean anything for me.

Then why are you continuing this? There can be only two reasons.

1. You think you can change my mind . . .which is a fruitless endeavor that has, in the past, yielded more skeptics. LOL. I once studied with the Jehovah Witnesses for six months. At which point, I told my teacher I felt I had clearly met her criteria of "if you can find anything in the Bible that contradicts what I am teaching you, then it's all wrong". She agreed. And left the church the next week. ::sigh:: I felt bad about that, as it had not been my goal. I had seriously wanted to find something to replace Mormonism in my life.
2. What I have said unsettles you and the only way you can be at peace is to prove me wrong. I suggest you give it immediately. I have been debating this topic and other topics related to Mormonism for 15 years. I have debated more than one "returned missionary" into the ground. IF you are honest and debate honestly, my arguments are impeccable and supported by ample evidence. If you choose to fall back on "I have my faith" you only diminish yourself in the eyes of thinking people and will, ultimately, have to face your dishonesty.

Please remember that I said I was a missionary for 2 years. If that wasn't a challenge to my faith, I am not sure what would count as one.

Come back and talk to me in ten years.

As for your bishop, he was wrong.

And by what authority do YOU decide this. I was told by my Stake President and the Patriarch that, as a single woman, I should obey my bishop as though he were my husband. That even if I disagreed with him, EVEN IF HE WAS WRONG, my obedience would be rewarded and I would not be held accountable of any mistakes the bishop might make in counseling me.

The thousands of LDS members I know, are all aware of the same scriptures and do not believe that is the interpretation of any of them.

James E. Faust, then a member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, explained the difference between Apostolic and personal revelation:

"The prophets, seers, and revelators have had and still have the responsibility and privilege of receiving and declaring the word of God for the world. Individual members, parents, and leaders have the right to receive revelation for their own responsibility but have no duty nor right to declare the word of God beyond the limits of their own responsibility."

What I am hearing here is that you are a life time Mormon who has no problem interpreting things to fit your own world view. That is the road to stuff like the FLDS. Although, to be honest, it's the LDS Church that changed doctrine, not the FLDS. If you read D&C Section 132:

61 And again, as pertaining to the law of the priesthood-if any man espouse a virgin, and desire to espouse another, and the first give her consent, and if he espouse the second, and they are virgins, and have vowed to no other man, then is he justified; he cannot commit adultery for they are given unto him; for he cannot commit adultery with that that belongeth unto him and to no one else.

62 And if he have ten virgins given unto him by this law, he cannot commit adultery, for they belong to him, and they are given unto him; therefore is he justified.

I think that the constantly changing doctrine was what upset me the most, long before I actually committed the sin of getting pregnant. I remember discussing the Temple rituals with my bishop. I was upset because my grandfather had been a Mason and the Temple sacraments are almost word for word in some cases. My bishop assured me that that was because the Masons had gotten the rituals from Solomon himself and kept them intact for all these millennia. So I asked why, if the rituals were precisely as God had given them to Solomon, was the Church changing them now (the 90s when they removed the blood oaths). He continued to maintain that God, who I pointed out was "the same yesterday, today and tomorrow" felt it was time to change it. I then expressed my concern that Solomon was considered one of the greatest magicians of all time and that I had left the Masons because I felt their rituals were "pagan" and "witchcraft" . . .so if we were using Solomon was a magician and the rituals were witchcraft, by the Law itself we were committing the crime of witchcraft in the Temple.

At that he became angry and said, "Sister Freeland, you are going to Hell." (Of course, YOU might have to explain to non-Mormons what that is very humorous.)

Ok, ok, you got me. I'm debating.

But at least I'm not twisting your words for my benefit.

But at least I'm not twisting your words for my benefit.

Are you implying that I have twisted yours? I can assure I have twisted nothing, only sought to clarify when your phraseology was unclear.

So, what do you think the LDS Church's stance on "sex" is?

I assure you I'm not "a life time Mormon who has no problem interpreting things to fit my own world view".

However, I do believe thinking for yourself is important and necessary, considering full interpretation of anything is rarely provided for you.

Unless I've been incredibly naive for my entire life, most everyone I know in the LDS church believes that sex is for husband and wife only, but that it's meant to be enjoyed between them. In the context that I read the Kimball quote in, it was saying that just because a couple is married, doesn't mean that anything they want to do is ok (referring to "other" sexual acts).

That's about as simple as I can put it.

I assure you I'm not "a life time Mormon who has no problem interpreting things to fit my own world view".

So you follow all the commandments?

How about polygamy? Are you planning on have a hundred or so wives if you get to the mythical celestial kingdom?

However, I do believe thinking for yourself is important and necessary, considering full interpretation of anything is rarely provided for you.

So what DO you think about the constant changes in doctrine?

Unless I've been incredibly naive for my entire life, most everyone I know in the LDS church believes that sex is for husband and wife only, but that it's meant to be enjoyed between them. In the context that I read the Kimball quote in, it was saying that just because a couple is married, doesn't mean that anything they want to do is ok (referring to "other" sexual acts).

Because you want me to believe you have discussed this with anyone? LOL What exactly does "other" sexual acts mean? Can you have oral sex? What about oral stimulation only for arousal? How about female dominant? Manual stimulation to induce orgasm in the female, since so few females can achieve orgasm through intercourse alone? Let me guess, anything sex act that can't result in impregnation is "OTHER". Ie, the purpose of sex is to procreate.

Ok, you have got me. I'm not willing to continue this ridiculous dance around definitions and literal interpretations. Believe it or not, I am not trying to change your mind about anything, other than your refusal to believe the facts (I.E. that this lawn issue actually wasn't a result of people obsessing over yards because they can't have sex.)

I'm not just offended that you insist in believing something about the church that isn't actually true of me, a member of it, but that you apply this to all Utahns as well.

I'm not just offended that you insist in believing something about the church that isn't actually true of me

My first mil used to say, you'll get over or you'll die from it. I'm offended that so many men exercise unrighteous dominion over their wives, families and wards and branches with impunity.

but that you apply this to all Utahns as well

Not all. I have pagan friends in Utah. LOL I suspect they are too busy having sex to obsess about anything. :D Heck I have personally had quite a bit of nice sex in Utah. I love the Canyonlands.

So, about polygamy? LOL

The old folks next door that cut their grass at 7am. :)

Is this a serious response? because if it is.. that is the craziest thing i have ever heard. The old woman should have the right to choose whether she is to care for her grass or not. If you have a problem with your grass being effected with the quality of hers... then pay for her lawn to get fixed up... there should NOT be a law against not attending a lawn.

Hey, I'm joking. Did you notice what I said about money though? That was serious.

Djehuty, unfortunately, I totally understand your bitter humor. What kind of neighborhood do these people live in? Did it not cross a single person's mind that she might not have the money to grow a lawn in Orem? Where are the Boy Scouts or the Girl Guides or the Neighborhood Shouldawouldacoulda? 'Tis a shame. I only have the most rudimentary vision of Orem and I am shocked, shocked to think this could happen.

:P sorry Djehuty... some people out there do have ridiculous views like that... clearly.. i mean its a law lol.

LAWN enforcement is a very serious matter, regardless of your age. She didn't have to be cranky about it.

A friend of mine and I have a running joke. It goes like this - said in a good ol' boy accent:

"...it's the LAW."

You'd be surprised how often you get to say it, fallenframes. The land of the free has become the land of jumped up little men with badges bigger than their hearts.

The land of the free has become the land of jumped up little men with badges bigger than their hearts.

And at least one other non-functioning organ.

Didn't water her lawn.

Wasn't there a story a few months ago about a 70-odd year old woman who kept the cops away with guns for hours?

-Dave

...ahhhh...

amen djehuty

This is Orem in the Los Angeles area.

The picture caption above says Utah.

Yup, everyone in Utah hates Catholics, Jewish, and lesbians. Great comment.

Gottfried is right... This must be the Catholic/Jewish/Lesbian enclave.

It's a menorah! Ahhhh.... my jewish eyes are cryin... by the way, see any brown lawns in that pic?

I'm shocked and disappointed that Newsvine, a community normally passionate against injustice, seems to be overwhelmingly unoffended by this bigoted accusation.

The irony is that this comment is bigoted in that it assumes that most Utahn's must be bigots.

Why is it ok to be a bigot against religion, Mormons, or Utahn's in general, but to speak out so passionately against all other forms of prejudice or bias?

Renesis-Bigotry is always something OTHER PEOPLE are guilty of. "WE" are all angels-with the noblest of intentions always(sarcasm intended).

Why is it ok to be a bigot against religion, Mormons,

I was Mormon for a decade and they collaborated with the father of my youngest, one of their high priests, to steal her sixteen years ago. I reserve the right to ridicule and hate the Morons, whereever their sorry asses are, for the rest of my life.

Pheww-OK that's a good reason! That sucks. I've had a little experience with Mormons & ex-Mormons. Your comment is a perfect illustration of what the downside to Mormonism is.

I was Mormon for a decade and they collaborated with the father of my youngest, one of their high priests, to steal her sixteen years ago. I reserve the right to ridicule and hate the Morons, whereever their sorry asses are, for the rest of my life.

As incredibly sorry as I am to hear that and as much as it infuriates me, I think you'd do better to hate Mormonism itself for brainwashing and so terribly skewing the moral sensibilities of its more radical followers. There are plenty of Mormons in the world who aren't crazy or malicious.

A group of insane Muslims, acting on their faith, murdered nearly 3,000 civilian members of our society, but I don't think any of us here would say that's a good reason to hate Muslims.

I think you'd do better to hate Mormonism itself for brainwashing and so terribly skewing the moral sensibilities of its more radical followers.

The problem is ALL religion itself, not just Mormon, Catholic, Judaism, or Islam. For sane folks, it's a nice social club. For the insane, the mentally ill, it feeds their madness.

The problem is ALL religion itself, not just Mormon, Catholic, Judaism, or Islam. For sane folks, it's a nice social club. For the insane, the mentally ill, it feeds their madness.

Agreed.

Source

YES, they really think she should waste water on mere lawn in the middle of a huge drought. They are using it as an excuse to harrass her out of her home, I'm sure.
Just as worrisome, did you see that HAWAII of all places is unusually dry? That is a tropical paradise, and they are getting so little rain it is affecting agriculture.

Lots of neighborhoods have ridiculous covenants-keeping your lawn maintained is usually right at the top of the list. Most neighborhood covenents have a very narrow concept of "green"(if you get my drift)

other than cuttings ones roses and painting the fence the wrong color

I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that Utah is currently facing an epidemic of missing mattress tags...

I guess this means there are no ACTUAL crimes in Orem, Utah...

Not that anyone can report.