Inspired by this post on “Not Always Right”:
What religion would that be?
Mormon?
The ring may not be a significant part of the religion; she may just have some religious jewelry. I’m trying to figure out which Christian sect is considered un-Christian, sex-crazed and evil by other Christians.
Or maybe she’s the Pope? 
Oh, and I think it’s the history of polygamy that inspires the “sex-crazed” accusation against LDS’ers.
I’d guess LDS (aka Mormon), since a piece of jewelry called a “CTR ring” is a popular accessory in this faith. The CTR stands for “Choose the Right”, which is the title of a popular hymn.
And Kimstu just covered that better than I did, what with explaining the “sex-crazed” allegation against a faith with high standards of sexual morality. 
Thanks so much - I knew about the Mormon’s magic underwear but not about the ring.
Learned something new today!
Sounds like an LDS “CTR” ring. I’m not Mormon, but I’ve been led to believe that they aren’t magical rings but are more of a cultural thing. Are they actually made by the LDS Church itself or by private companies?
Private companies (I am LDS). You’re right that it’s cultural, not necessarily doctrinal. 
Magic underwear and decoder rings?
Neat!
Given the history of rivalry and persecution among various groups of Christians throughout history, almost any of them by almost any of the others.
As for the “un-Christian” claim, we’ve had threads discussing that, such as What Christian denominations consider Mormons as Christians too?
By some standards.
Indeed. It’s a hilarious standard that thinks you should be a virgin till you’re married. I can’t decide if such a standard is actively evil, or if it’s just really really stupid. I tend to lean towards the former though because it doesn’t seem to apply to men…
The Church of Sauron. Watch out for the Nine Apostles.
Why? Are you looking to join up? 
The first two, yes, but not the last one, as sexuality is one place where there’s rather broad agreement.
And, contrary to what’s been said above, it’s not stupid, it’s just based on what many consider antiquated morals. Before protection and without abortion, it’s pretty risky to be having sex just for fun and not with an intent to create a family.
And it applies more to women only because the results were more visible. Christianity, despite what many people think, is more of a female religion and has been for a while. It’s all about applying traditionally female values to men: i.e., less aggressiveness, more love and caring, stuff like that.
This isn’t really GQ anymore, but: 
Love and caring are not traditionally male values?
ISTM that Christianity has always strongly affirmed the values of love and caring (not to mention abstaining from aggression) through male expressions of them: Jesus himself, Paul and the early Christian communities (and Paul, of course, was not particularly gender-egalitarian or pro-woman in his outlook), St. Benedict, St. Francis, and so on.
In what way is this not idiotically sexist?
Simple Linctus: That really wasn’t what I was talking about when I referred to questionable definitions of morality.
Since the question in the OP has evidently been answered, and others have decided to use this thread to make a variety of off-topic posts, I’m closing this. If you want to engage in debate about any of this, take it to GD.
Colibri
General Questions Moderator