4 ms·

Mormons also believe that any sexual relations outside of a legal, heterosexual marriage are a sin. I believe in this doctrine. I had many friends who found thi

Mormons also believe that any sexual relations outside of a legal, heterosexual marriage are a sin. I believe in this doctrine. I had many friends who found this doctrine hard to live by between that wanted to act on opposite-sex attraction with glee! I also found this doctrine REALLY hard. I wanted, really wanted, to act with some glee on some people I was attracted to and who were attracted to me. But I didn't. I dated, I got married, and now I have a happy marriage and family. Would I have been judged? Maybe. Did I have fear of judgement? Maybe. I do know I felt there was a benefit to following this doctrine of celibacy and marriage. Did I judge my friends who didn't follow this? No I did not. Did they feel judged? Possibly, you'd have to ask them. I do know a number of them wish they had followed this doctrine when they did not in the past. My point is, beliefs by their very nature can make people feel uncomfortable. Beliefs by their very nature can be very hard to live by. Should we remove them all? Where do we draw the line?

DanBC 10y ago
> Where do we draw the line? Beliefs that cause an increase in death by suicide probably need to be looked at to see if they're really that important.
- cookiecaper 10y ago
  The myth that an external force can drive otherwise-sane people to suicide merely by disapproving of some of their behaviors needs to go. It is, ironically, perpetuated to shame and humiliate political opponents, by insidiously attempting to saddle them with responsibility for the deaths of the depressed and mentally ill. Healthy people do not commit suicide, and they certainly don't over issues as ethereal and inconsequential as some religion's disapproval. Just having any religion automatically makes you the target of more condemnation than not, because most religions reserve eternal bliss for their own members. Furthermore, almost every religion preaches against theft, dishonesty, duplicity, extramarital sexual conduct of any kind, and a range of other basic moral violations that are consistently verboten throughout the history of the human family. People violate these things routinely and, despite the frequent imperatives issued and social pressures imposed to encourage compliance, somehow refrain from killing themselves. If the argument is that it's about the typical human response to homosexual conduct being so negative that it drives people over the edge, I don't see how the Mormon church, or most other Christian churches, could have any culpability for that, since a universal Christian theme is redemption, forgiveness, and an ability to leave behind a past life of sin and error whenever one commits themselves to doing so. Mormonism in particular, as described in the parent comment, makes an effort to be civil and polite, and to encourage families to fellowship and associate with their children and friends regardless of one's level of agreement with their personal choices, including their sexual choices. That doesn't mean that one must endorse, accept, witness, or accommodate any and all behaviors, but it means that one should remain respectful and polite, treat others with dignity and decorum, and continue to have contact in a positive manner to the fullest extent possible. The Church is compassionate and welcoming to sinners [read: humans] of all types. No special scrutiny or shame is applied to persons who are inclined to sin by engaging in homosexual behaviors vs. those are inclined to sin differently. Any type of sexual misconduct, heterosexual or homosexual, is forbidden by the Church and regularly preached against, and I guarantee you there are many more adulterous husbands feeling guilt and shame over the much-more-frequently discussed topic of marital fidelity than there are homosexuals feeling shame on the rather rare occasion that homosexuality is broached.
  - DanBC 10y ago
    > The myth that an external force can drive otherwise-sane people to suicide merely by disapproving of some of their behaviors needs to go. It's not a myth. It's reasonably well established now that LGBT youth are at increased risk of suicide, and that the rates of death in LGBT youth are higher in areas that have lower acceptance of LGBT youth. The rest of your post is full of inaccuracies about suicide. You need to read some more modern research. Here's a good place to start: http://research.bmh.manchester.ac.uk/cmhs http://research.bmh.manchester.ac.uk/cmhs BTW: That "committed" word? That's a big signal.
    - cookiecaper 10y ago
      Restating the point does not constitute a rebuttal. I understand that there is a myth along these lines. The myth, of course, specifies that homosexuals feel oppression, which causes them to commit suicide. I also understand that people have published documents to attempt to give support to this myth that suicide is correlated with the quantity of social approval. This has several loose ends, like "How are LGBT youth identified, and is that method reliable, particularly with reference to the effect of puberty and hormonal changes on sexual inclinations?", "Are there other regional factors that are better explanations for the increased teen suicide rate? [e.g., areas with 'less social acceptance' for LGBT may also have increased poverty, decreased access to mental health services, etc.]", "Do we see this affect of suicide motivated solely by social approval among other groups, including those whose oppression and/or isolation is much more serious or intense?", and so on. As with most publications dealing with controversial issues in the soft sciences, there is plenty of room for disagreement, and on inspection, it usually becomes clear that the publication is intended to promote a particular agenda or conclusion rather than to break through to new objective understandings or research. This is true across the spectrum, and it's why you have both left-wing and right-wing "think tanks". This myth is a transparent political device intended to humiliate and silence those who'd disagree, and we've had weak enough backbones the last 30 years or so that we've allowed it to work. EDIT: Your edit is a good example of the lecturing, elitist tone used in shame-based political opposition. It's funny that you single out the term "commit suicide" as some type of indicator, like we're to believe that suicide is not something that someone does, but rather a random accidental event. Again, I fully understand that there are people who will wrap such absurd conclusions in dense, self-indulgent academic babble and pretend like this grants it credibility, but most people have a sense of connection to reality, a limit on their willing suspension of disbelief invoked by the academic credential, that disallows such disconnected, convoluted logic from taking hold. The funny thing here is that the purveyors of these theories hardly realize the vast amount of religiosity that goes into their willingness to believe not just the unfalsifiable and supernatural, but the clearly hysterical and nonsensical conclusions that these groups and organizations emit.
ScottBurson 10y ago
> Beliefs by their very nature can be very hard to live by. Should we remove them all? Where do we draw the line? A fair question, and one we must each ultimately answer for ourselves. I'm glad your choices worked out for you. I had a number of sexual relationships before I got married. While there are certainly some particular encounters and entanglements I regret -- more the ones where I caused pain than where I felt pain -- there were also several I look back on fondly. Even though we weren't right for each other for the long run, we loved, we shared, we grew, and they are part of who I am now. I love my wife very much, but I'm still glad to have known others.

DanBC 10y ago

> Where do we draw the line? Beliefs that cause an increase in death by suicide probably need to be looked at to see if they're really that important.

cookiecaper 10y ago
The myth that an external force can drive otherwise-sane people to suicide merely by disapproving of some of their behaviors needs to go. It is, ironically, perpetuated to shame and humiliate political opponents, by insidiously attempting to saddle them with responsibility for the deaths of the depressed and mentally ill. Healthy people do not commit suicide, and they certainly don't over issues as ethereal and inconsequential as some religion's disapproval. Just having any religion automatically makes you the target of more condemnation than not, because most religions reserve eternal bliss for their own members. Furthermore, almost every religion preaches against theft, dishonesty, duplicity, extramarital sexual conduct of any kind, and a range of other basic moral violations that are consistently verboten throughout the history of the human family. People violate these things routinely and, despite the frequent imperatives issued and social pressures imposed to encourage compliance, somehow refrain from killing themselves. If the argument is that it's about the typical human response to homosexual conduct being so negative that it drives people over the edge, I don't see how the Mormon church, or most other Christian churches, could have any culpability for that, since a universal Christian theme is redemption, forgiveness, and an ability to leave behind a past life of sin and error whenever one commits themselves to doing so. Mormonism in particular, as described in the parent comment, makes an effort to be civil and polite, and to encourage families to fellowship and associate with their children and friends regardless of one's level of agreement with their personal choices, including their sexual choices. That doesn't mean that one must endorse, accept, witness, or accommodate any and all behaviors, but it means that one should remain respectful and polite, treat others with dignity and decorum, and continue to have contact in a positive manner to the fullest extent possible. The Church is compassionate and welcoming to sinners [read: humans] of all types. No special scrutiny or shame is applied to persons who are inclined to sin by engaging in homosexual behaviors vs. those are inclined to sin differently. Any type of sexual misconduct, heterosexual or homosexual, is forbidden by the Church and regularly preached against, and I guarantee you there are many more adulterous husbands feeling guilt and shame over the much-more-frequently discussed topic of marital fidelity than there are homosexuals feeling shame on the rather rare occasion that homosexuality is broached.
- DanBC 10y ago
  > The myth that an external force can drive otherwise-sane people to suicide merely by disapproving of some of their behaviors needs to go. It's not a myth. It's reasonably well established now that LGBT youth are at increased risk of suicide, and that the rates of death in LGBT youth are higher in areas that have lower acceptance of LGBT youth. The rest of your post is full of inaccuracies about suicide. You need to read some more modern research. Here's a good place to start: http://research.bmh.manchester.ac.uk/cmhs http://research.bmh.manchester.ac.uk/cmhs BTW: That "committed" word? That's a big signal.
  - cookiecaper 10y ago
    Restating the point does not constitute a rebuttal. I understand that there is a myth along these lines. The myth, of course, specifies that homosexuals feel oppression, which causes them to commit suicide. I also understand that people have published documents to attempt to give support to this myth that suicide is correlated with the quantity of social approval. This has several loose ends, like "How are LGBT youth identified, and is that method reliable, particularly with reference to the effect of puberty and hormonal changes on sexual inclinations?", "Are there other regional factors that are better explanations for the increased teen suicide rate? [e.g., areas with 'less social acceptance' for LGBT may also have increased poverty, decreased access to mental health services, etc.]", "Do we see this affect of suicide motivated solely by social approval among other groups, including those whose oppression and/or isolation is much more serious or intense?", and so on. As with most publications dealing with controversial issues in the soft sciences, there is plenty of room for disagreement, and on inspection, it usually becomes clear that the publication is intended to promote a particular agenda or conclusion rather than to break through to new objective understandings or research. This is true across the spectrum, and it's why you have both left-wing and right-wing "think tanks". This myth is a transparent political device intended to humiliate and silence those who'd disagree, and we've had weak enough backbones the last 30 years or so that we've allowed it to work. EDIT: Your edit is a good example of the lecturing, elitist tone used in shame-based political opposition. It's funny that you single out the term "commit suicide" as some type of indicator, like we're to believe that suicide is not something that someone does, but rather a random accidental event. Again, I fully understand that there are people who will wrap such absurd conclusions in dense, self-indulgent academic babble and pretend like this grants it credibility, but most people have a sense of connection to reality, a limit on their willing suspension of disbelief invoked by the academic credential, that disallows such disconnected, convoluted logic from taking hold. The funny thing here is that the purveyors of these theories hardly realize the vast amount of religiosity that goes into their willingness to believe not just the unfalsifiable and supernatural, but the clearly hysterical and nonsensical conclusions that these groups and organizations emit.

ScottBurson 10y ago

> Beliefs by their very nature can be very hard to live by. Should we remove them all? Where do we draw the line? A fair question, and one we must each ultimately answer for ourselves. I'm glad your choices worked out for you. I had a number of sexual relationships before I got married. While there are certainly some particular encounters and entanglements I regret -- more the ones where I caused pain than where I felt pain -- there were also several I look back on fondly. Even though we weren't right for each other for the long run, we loved, we shared, we grew, and they are part of who I am now. I love my wife very much, but I'm still glad to have known others.