MrShorty

Whether it be porn or any other sin my view is that we, as members, ought to be less judgmental and more inclined to show sympathy and compassion towards those who are living in sin. Why? Because, believe it or not, every single one of us are living in sin and do we not all beg for mercy, compassion, and acceptance from Heavenly Father? And if we are not begging, do we not at least hope, wish, and wonder if Heavenly Father has mercy and compassion for us?
 
There is a tendency, not universal of course, but a strong tendency in my experience in life for members of the Church to essentially kick the sinner/addict when they are down because they believe they are more righteous than the filthy, perverted porn addict (alcoholic, etc.). I see people in my Ward who are struggling with addictions and I know that in most cases these individuals already feel like crap. They already think they are worthless. They already feel like they aren't worthy to be with members of the Church. So, they don't come to church. They don't participate. They are more inclined to stay away. In some cases their feelings are not justified but in many cases they are because members can and do judge them. What these people need are not overreactions and people preaching to them how horrible they are or how horrendous their actions are (they already know or feel that). What they need is to feel compassion. To know that they are loved and accepted, despite their sins. This is what I want the people I know in my ward who are struggling with addictions to know. I want them to know that its okay to have weaknesses and still come to church. That is what church is for. It is for the weak and the wicked. Come and be with us. We love you. We want you to be healed. Come get strength from joining with those who are struggling just like you are, albeit with maybe different sins and different trials, but we are still relying on the Atonement of Jesus Christ and are begging for mercy like you. I may have a testimony of the gospel and I know the atonement is real but I don't have everything figured out.
 
-Finrock

I think the point Quin is trying to convey is that the LDS cultural response to pornography is disproportionate to the offense.  How many people times have we heard people say that they would consider leaving their spouse if they found him or her viewing pornography?  
 
The LDS culture tends to conflate viewing pornography with pornography addiction with sexual addiction.  What Quin has said is true.  There are countless men outside of the LDS culture who view pornography, perhaps even regularly, and they are able to function normally in society and have normal, healthy, marital relationships.  That doesn't mean it's "right" or "ok" to view pornography.  But LDS culture has talked this up so much that there are many that feel that any level of consumption is an imminent danger to the eternal salvation of the consumer.  
 
A healthier dialog would be one that slamjet has already referred to.  It's about control, or loss of control.  We need to understand why people consume pornography.  More often than not, it has very little to do with sex, and more to do with addiction and coping with stress.  Placing such high stakes on the game--such as fear of a spouse leaving, or fear of an impossible path to repentance--is often counterproductive to the healing of people that are in need of it.
 
At least that's what I saw in Quin's response.  Perhaps it's because I don't subscribe to the LDS dialog surrounding pornography.

I'm not sure I fully understand Godly sorrow. Alma describes it as guilt/shame/"trouble which shall bring you down to repentance." (Alma 42:29) This suggests to me that it also possible to feel guilt/shame/sorrow for sin that does not lead to repentance (one example in Mormon 2:13). Alma implies that some of this is the choice of the sinner in responding to their guilt. I'm not sure I fully understand the responsibility of the Church and its members in this process, but it seems to me that our goal should be promoting the kind of sorrow/guilt/shame that leads to repentance. When we find that our dialog seems to be promoting depression, resignation, or anything other than genuine repentance, maybe we have a responsibility to consider our dialog and see if we need a different approach (or a library of different approaches until we find what will work for a specific individual) that will promote repentance.

Ditto.Including time spent in the military.
I suspect it's more the taboo nature that makes it seem like a much bigger problem than it is.
Like pop-illnesses. SARS, Avian Flu, H1N1, etc. cause most people to FREAK out, even derailing their lives for days/weeks/months agonizing over it... The media launches circuses... It's just a huge huge huge deal for people... Emotionally. But these pop-illnesses tend to kill 12, 40, 150 people. Which is NOTHING compared to all the illnesses we don't even blink at. The cold & flu kill apx 35,000 - 50,000 in the US alone, per year. (Can't get link to work...CDC.gov has the stats). As do most of the others, we blithely walk around terror-free from. Mortality and morbidity stats in the tens of thousands. Or even higher.
People don't blink at the cold/flu... But freak at illness that kills 12 people. Not because they're a huge problem, but because of the novelty.
Non-LDS don't blink at porn & MB... But LDS-culture freaks, I posit, again because of the novelty.
It's not something we're used to as a culture, as it's proscribed... So we make mountains out of molehills.
Q

Let's also not neglect the effect of personal perception and discernment. I expect the three of us have all sat through the same lessons and discussions about sex and relationships (both before and after marriage). Many, like you, develop healthy sexual relationships based on those principles just fine. A minority of us did not, and some of us feel like the teachings we took home from church (whether they were actually taught there or no) are a part of that. In the spirit of "seeking the one," we feel like the Church (as an institution and we as the body) should at least consider if our approach could be improved. If we go through the process and decide that everything is fine as is and should not be changed, fine. Some feel there are improvements to be made, if we would consider them.

I believe that you have responded well.  Much better than I expected.  I would add my thought that we fear some truths because of lack of faith in truth and a G-d of truth.
 
The question is - why did the Jews reject Jesus.  I have not understood this.  Near the Dead Sea select and faithful Jews sacrificed much looking for a Messiah - more than I have and yet they did not (at least from scripture) recognize the Christ.  Again about 30 years after the established community of Jews participated in the murder of Jesus the same community sacrificed much more than I ever have for their faith and belief in G-d.  Thousands watched as their wives and children were abused, tortured and murdered while they were forced to watch and all could be stopped if they would just deny the G-d of their fathers.  I do not know if I would endure such a thing – feeling forsaken of G-d even as Jesus did upon the cross.  Was their suffering punishment?  Only if G-d is the contradiction of his own teachings – Jesus suffered to so the Jews would be punished but that we can all escape the punishment of hell.
 
I do not know why the Jews rejected Jesus – I cannot find answers or reasons that convince me – especially that convinces me that in their shoes I would do any better.   The promise is that Jesus will return – and who will be willing to endure more than the Jews have.  And prior to when Jesus comes again, who will comfort those suffering if there is another option? 
 
I am concerned that if we believe we will be spared the suffering (the rapture) that should we suffer we will forsake as we think we are forsaken

As small as Wyoming is compared to Canada, it is still a fairly large state. Where in Wy would you go? Yellowstone/Teton/Jackson area? Devil\'s Tower/Black Hills? Oregon/Mormon Trail sites (Fort Casper, Martin\'s Cove, South Pass, Ft Bridger)?
If you decide to emphasize history, you might try staying in Casper and exploring the Oregon/Mormon trail in Eastern Wyoming. Several sites to see, and maybe even some \"toddler friendly\" rock climbing at Independence Rock.

In many ways I think you are right -- in the same sense that we might say that \"most\" people don\'t need to use insulin to manage blood sugar or \"most\" people don\'t need anti-depressants/therapy to be reasonably happy. I saw a statement by Michelle Weiner-Davis suggesting that only about 1/3 of couple really struggle with \"desire discrepancy\". Other studies suggest only 15-20% of marriages are clinically sexless (10 or fewer sexual encounters per year). It seems to me that you are correct in that a majority of couples probably don\'t need a lot of \"educational material\" to come together and figure out what a healthy and satisfying sexual relationship looks like. I also agree that Hollywood (and other media: porn/romance novels/etc.) has contributed a lot of incorrect teachings around sex and relationships. On the flip side of that, though, is how the way we tend to teach about sex and relationships in the Church/religious people in general also contribute to sexual dysfunctions (what Laura Brotherson has called \"good girl syndrome\"). Ideas like \"sex is a necessary evil to be minimized\" or \"true love does not have a sexual component to it\" or \"sex is only for procreation\" show up in many different within our Church/religious culture. Some of us need real help to understand the \"truth\" that seems to be somewhere between what Hollywood seems to teach and what the Church often seems to teach.

No, my background is in the physical sciences, not the social sciences. My studies on this topic were/are inspired by several years in a sexless marriage. Over the years, I have had to study to try to understand God's real purposes for sexuality (still learning and unlearning all of the "good boy syndrome" things that I thought the Church was trying to teach me about sexuality). Over the course of that time, I have come across these authors/therapists who have taught me a lot about sex and marriage.
 
There's a possible avenue for an additional question to explore. Explore whether someone believes that any education about sex in marriage has to come from "the Church", from Christians, or if secular sources are appropriate (within certain limits). If I remember the comment about doing x correctly, it was in reference to some of Dr. Schnarch's ideas -- and Dr. Schnarch is decidedly secular. The first of his books I picked up, I quickly dismissed, because I didn't think I should be learning anything from someone who believes "that" about homosexuality (for example). Had I maintained that aversion to his writings, I think I would have missed out on some valuable teaching (because LDS sexual education materials have nothing that even begins to approach the way Dr. Schnarch approaches those kind of issues).

I went through the survey and left several comments on several questions. A lot of my comments were about how should the person taking the survey define words (I particularly didn't like the use of the word "struggle" in many of the questions). There were also a few questions that I wasn't sure how the answer would have been useful.