Grey_Wolf_Leader

Members
  • Posts

    4
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Grey_Wolf_Leader

  1. The issue is that the relationships exist, and it reality cause no real harm except what is perceived by certain peoples morals.

    I am sorry my friend, but what you just said is certifiably false. This is what we religious people have been saying for a long time. Homosexual behavior does cause real world harm.

    Studies done on same-sex attracted (hereafter to be referred to as SSA) individuals in the Netherlands (where social acceptance of SSA is far greater than here in America) has revealed that those who practice homosexual behavior have verifiably lower life-expectancy, much higher rates of partners per lifetime, higher risk of STDs, tremendous emotional problems, higher rates of depression, drug abuse, high rates of sexual abuse (caused by partners, not homophobic strangers [remember, all this is in the Netherlands]) and more. All of this contributes to a net negative impact on society.

    Teaching that these relationships exist and the people who are in them should receive at least basic respect as human beings shouldn't go against anyone's morals.

    In case you have not realized, one of the fundamental tenants of the LDS religion is that we are all spirit children of the same God, and thus all are to be afforded the simple dignity and respect as spirit siblings.

    A similar idea permeates the rest of Christianity. "We are all humans, we all should treat each other with dignity and respect."

    As a result, we don't need schools having special classes just to teach people to be extra courteous to one particular behavioral minority. If we are to do that, we should just have a general class to teach children to be courteous to all behavioral and religious minorities, including my own (Mormon).

    Those who actually practice Christianity respect those with SSA as human being, but that does not mean we need to respect their poor choice of a relationship or condone their poor behavior.

  2. Well, I think a lot of LDS people are taught, from a very young age, to feel ashamed of their sexuality. Official LDS doctrine teaches that sex is positive, in the right context, but many individual members of the Church hang on to more repressive Puritan beliefs, teach them to their children, and that can be damaging.

    Actually, it's not really fair to the Puritans that we use their name as a term for "unhealthy, repressive shaming" tactics. If you study the Puritans closely, many of whom were ancestors of Joseph Smith, you realize that their beliefs are nothing like what people portray them. In fact, one particular Puritan preacher was well known in his time for his sermons which lauded marital sexuality. That could hardly be considered repressive.

    Part of the problem may be that parents simply don't perform as effective a job as they should--or fail their job completely by refusing to talk about it in the first place--and then people expect some outside authority, whether it be public schools, the culture, or the Church, to bear the responsible instead of the parents.

    A large part of Western culture is still influenced by the Christian church, and you will find that LDS are not alone in promoting chastity. However, you are certainly right that many, many Westerners have a pretty casual attitude about sexuality.

    You are most certainly right that many churches from the Catholics to the Baptists and Evangelicals share our belief in the value of Chastity and proclaim it. But there are many "socially progressive" liberal churches out there who claim to be Christan and side with the boys in power: the secularists in academia and the media who pretty much control our society as well as what we see and hear in the culture. It's not exactly a fair game when only one side's pinching the ear of the referee.

  3. Thank you very much everyone for your insightful contributions.

    Honestly, I thought that this subject might be a little too serious and heavy and that I might actually get banned for it, and only on my very first post too! :itwasntme:

    Satan. He has used the media to great effect in convincing people that not being sexually active is not only bad for you but it makes you a laughing stock of every sensible person.

    That is definitely a good answer.

    I recall that the restored gospel points out Lucifer doesn't have a body.

    So, part of his ill-intentions towards all of us, his spirit siblings who chose to follow God and not him, those of us who got bodies for keeping our first estate as a reward for our loyalty, may be something of an inferiority complex.

    He's jealous and covetous of our sacred gift. The inheritance that we got and he didn't.

    And thus the first item on his agenda would naturally be to vandalize and ruin that gift.

    It's kind of like how a really jealous brother would like to take his rival sibling's fancy new sports car on a destructive joy-ride.

  4. Over the past few years I have been wandering the internet gobbling up information as I go like Pac-Man, and a few months ago I hit upon the search term "Mormon Sexuality" in Google's recommended searches list. I hit enter and up came a looooonnnngg list of various sites.

    A select few were positive, like ones about feminine sexuality via popular LDS therapists, doctors, counselors, and authors like Jennifer Finlayson-Fife or Laura M. Brotherson.

    The vast majority however were either supposed "Mormon Hidden History" exposure sites with pages on our sexual beliefs [all portraying them in the most negative light possible], ex-Mormon rant sites, and a few secular journalistic pieces with obviously dismissive and irreverently tones on Mormon sexual beliefs.

    The words which appeared in these results were surprisingly consistent. Terms like, "repression", "self-hate", "shame", "social conditioning", et cetera, et cetera kept popping up.

    There were even a couple of sites with members who claimed to be LDS, but whose writings clearly left nothing to imagination that they did not practice the Law of Chastity.

    As a deeply intellectual person, I have long studied my religion and have tried to build a complete, encompassing, and yet simplified personal concept map which lays out my beliefs and how they interrelate, especially in contrast to the modern secular world.

    And I see little but open hostility in the Western World towards the very idea that you shouldn't have sex whenever you want, without regard to whether you are married, or even for whomever your partner is.

    What are your thoughts? Why do you think people dislike Chastity so much? (Aside from the obvious "gets in the way of fun" part I mean).