LDS Garments: Why I Want Out of This Club

[Eddie]

I have no idea if made-at-home-garments are a no-no because no one ever talks about it. I assume the pioneers made their own by just putting marks on their existing underwear. I'm not sure why we couldn't do the same. If a bishop or other leader made a stink about it I'd just ask what the difference is between homemade garments and church produced garments. As long as the marks are in the right place I see no reason to worry. Change in the church comes from the bottom up, not the top down.

As a church with a focus on provident living and learning to provide for ourselves, I can't imagine there not being a means for people to produce their own. I mean, what about that guy in East Germany who kept his tithing in a jar for 20 years until his home teachers came for a visit. I mean - do they expect him to wear the same underwear for 20 years?

And no one seems to ever say anything about the impropriety of a home teacher accepting tithing from the man - I think officially only a member of the bishopric is supposed to do that.

So I imagine 50 years from now the story will be about how someone was so faithful that they even made their own garments to make sure they had them.

Not completely off topic - as a fan of provident living myself, is there a big difference between sending something in to be printed by that company versus taking a sharpie to whatever it is that needs marking and doing it myself?

[pellegrino]

I forwarded the link to a friend who works at Beehive. She started freaking out.

We all expect you to follow up and report back.

[Shaka]

We all expect you to follow up and report back.

She just came back with, "Only the First Presidency can authorize screen printed markings!"

Not very exciting.

[FMCoug]

She just came back with, "Only the First Presidency can authorize screen printed markings!"

Not very exciting.

The people behind that site are going to be exed becasue of you. Hope you're proud.

[Northwestcoug]

I have no idea if made-at-home-garments are a no-no because no one ever talks about it. I assume the pioneers made their own by just putting marks on their existing underwear. I'm not sure why we couldn't do the same. If a bishop or other leader made a stink about it I'd just ask what the difference is between homemade garments and church produced garments. As long as the marks are in the right place I see no reason to worry. Change in the church comes from the bottom up, not the top down.

Surely there's a pun about garments in there somewhere...

[Indy Coug]

Surely there's a pun about garments in there somewhere...

I'm sure you can wedgie one in there.

[Moliere]

She just came back with, "Only the First Presidency can authorize screen printed markings!"

Not very exciting.

Ask her for a reference (even non-scriptural (Ensign, JoD, etc.) will do).

[pellegrino]

She just came back with, "Only the First Presidency can authorize screen printed markings!"

Not very exciting.

boring.

I don't understand Mormon attitudes toward the garment. I get that it represents something sacred, but it's not like the design itself is sacred, or even inspired. IMO if people are uncomfortable with or have needs that aren't met by the options presented by beehive clothing then they should feel free to use their own common sense and do what they need to make it work for them. It seems like this website provides some options for people.

As an aside I think that it's important to recognize that using the garment as a means to ensure modesty among Mormons was never intended by Joseph when he introduced it. That it has become such now seems to me to be a perversion of it, even an abuse of priesthood authority.

[Northwestcoug]

I'm sure you can wedgie one in there.

[wuapinmon]

Of course the Church wants to control garment production. They don't make money off G's; they make money off control of access to their purchase, which costs you less than making them yourself and 10% of your annual increase.

[clackamascoug]

A non member acquaintance I once knew, asked if I wore the special underwear. I said yes. He asked why. I said, I already planned on wearing underwear, so I just figured that wearing underwear that reminded me to be my best self was an even better idea. That seemed to satisfy him, and the weirdness of garments seemed diminished.

[ewth8tr]

A non member acquaintance I once knew, asked if I wore the special underwear. I said yes. He asked why. I said, I already planned on wearing underwear, so I just figured that wearing underwear that reminded me to be my best self was an even better idea. That seemed to satisfy him, and the weirdness of garments seemed diminished.

If everyone chose their underwear based on that, I don't think any woman would be wearing garments.

Sent from my SGH-I777 using Tapatalk 2

[Uncle Ted]

The people behind that site are going to be exed becasue of you. Hope you're proud.

Damn... I hope they returned the "garments" I sent them.

[Sullyute]

She just came back with, "Only the First Presidency can authorize screen printed markings!"

Not very exciting.

Ask her for a reference (even non-scriptural (Ensign, JoD, etc.) will do).

Handbook of Instruction #1, Section 3.4.2 states, "The distribution and sale of garments requires the authorization of the First Presidency."

Since they are not selling garments (just adding symbols to your clothing) and not distributing garments (just returning the clothing you sent them) it seems they found a nice loophole.

[Moliere]

Handbook of Instruction #1, Section 3.4.2 states, "The distribution and sale of garments requires the authorization of the First Presidency."

Since they are not selling garments (just adding symbols to your clothing) and not distributing garments (just returning the clothing you sent them) it seems they found a nice loophole.

I cannot read a sealed book