Dating/marriage between converts and non-converts

[Jamie123]

There is a thread elsewhere on this site asking: “Would you date a convert?” A good many people answered “yes” or “absolutely!”, but I find it troubling that the question should be asked at all.

The “no” argument seems to run: If you are a convert to Mormonism then you must have a pre-Mormon "past", which probably involved a certain degree of "sinning" - maybe even of a sexual nature - and though God has wiped your slate clean, this possibility renders you unfit to marry someone who has lived the Gospel faithfully since childhood.

Bad news indeed for the single convert in a traditionally Mormon area, who (if everyone took this view) would need to search for another single convert to marry, or remain permanently single and never enjoy the blessings of matrimony.

Ergo “converts are second-class citizens”.

It disturbs me deeply that anyone who considers himself "Christian" should even consider this. It seems to go so totally against everything Christ taught - not to mention that Joseph Smith himself was a convert (as were all Mormons of his generation). But of course that's just my opinion.

Edited March 6, 2009 by Jamie123

[Elgama]

I am a convert and to a point it does not concern me - I think we should be discerning about what we want for our children and family.

I could not attend a mission because of illness, but I wanted someone who had served a mission when I got married as I wanted that spirit in my home. Likewise because I was a convert personally I wanted my children to have an LDS heritage on the other side with church member grandparents, and they have got great grandparents. Everyone needs to convert - and I deeply admire LDS that do it from within the church, but I would not have the level of understanding of what they are going through, my husband is better equipped to help them with some of the trials they will go through that I cannot understand.

I personally wanted the balance in our home they have a parent who converted into the church and one who converted within the church

-Charley

[FunkyTown]

There is a thread elsewhere on this site asking: “Would you date a convert?” A good many people answered “yes” or “absolutely!”, but I find it troubling that the question should be asked at all.

The “no” argument seems to run: If you are a convert to Mormonism then you must have a pre-Mormon "past", which probably involved a certain degree of "sinning" - maybe even of a sexual nature - and though God has wiped your slate clean, this possibility renders you unfit to marry someone who has lived the Gospel faithfully since childhood.

Bad news indeed for the single convert in a traditionally Mormon area, who (if everyone took this view) would need to search for another single convert to marry, or remain permanently single and never enjoy the blessings of matrimony.

Ergo “converts are second-class citizens”.

It disturbs me deeply that anyone who considers himself "Christian" should even consider this. It seems to go so totally against everything Christ taught - not to mention that Joseph Smith himself was a convert (as were all Mormons of his generation). But of course that's just my opinion.

I've never felt like a second class citizen in the church and I'm a convert. With a past. Were there women who wouldn't consider dating me? Probably. But those same women were usually some of the sweetest, nicest, most Molly people in the world. I have nothing but love and respect for them. Plus, I think we wouldn't get along in a relationship, anyway, so I'm grateful that I ended up dating other types.

[bytor2112]

Growing up in the church doesn't necessarily mean that someone has been faithful to the Gospel all their lives. It is certainly easier to have a relationship when both parties are members of the Church. I have seen what happens when a faithful member marries a non-member, sometimes things work out, but from what I have seen it presents a problem.

As far as transgressing....Latter Day Saints can be just as guilty, sexual sins included, and just as forgiven. If the Lord has forgiven and forgotten, we MUST do the same.

[WillowTheWhisp]

Yep, growing up in the church doesn't mean you don't have a past. Sometimes people who grow up in the church don't have a testimony, they just have a tradition. A convert could be a more faithful Saint.

[hordak]

Yep, growing up in the church doesn't mean you don't have a past. Sometimes people who grow up in the church don't have a testimony, they just have a tradition. A convert could be a more faithful Saint.

I concur. IMO Adult converts are "better" then the inborn crowd (which i am a part of) because the sought out the gospel instead of having it taught to them as the truth since birth like every other religion/ denomination. Generally speaking of course.

[Maxel]

I concur. IMO Adult converts are "better" then the inborn crowd (which i am a part of) because the sought out the gospel instead of having it taught to them as the truth since birth like every other religion/ denomination. Generally speaking of course.

I understand your sentiment, but I wish to state that the view reverses the stigma and makes the "inborn" crowd second-class citizens (in most cases). Joseph Smith may have been a convert, but the majority of the past Presidents of the modern-day Church have pioneer lineage and were born in the faith.

In the end, 110% of a person's spiritual status before God relies solely upon themselves and how well they react to both the Light of Christ and the Holy Ghost in their lives. I've seen many converts and pioneer-lineage Mormons fall away from the Church. Conversely, I've seen many converts and pioneer-lineage Mormons stay faithful to the Church in the face of dire temptations. God gives us what we need in our lives, and if we need to be born out of the covenant to fully appreciate God's church and priesthood, then so be it. Either way, being a religious convert or being born Mormon doesn't matter- what matters is a person's personal spiritual conversion, their 'wrestle before God' (as Enos put it) which ever soul who lives to adulthood must undergo to gain their own salvation.

[NeuroTypical]

It disturbs me deeply that anyone who considers himself "Christian" should even consider this.

Oh, I'm not disturbed deeply by it, I'm just sad to see their ignorance. I mean, it's not like a ton of mormon kids don't sin abundantly. I have a buddy who lost his virginity at a YM/YW activity for pete's sake.

I guess some folks prefer blinders.

LM

[Guest missingsomething]

Here's my two cents:

1) Doesnt matter if you were born in or came afterwards... EVERYONE must convert in the sense that they must decide for themselves (and not because of family traditions) that the teaching of the church is true.

2) There is not one saint alive that if they do not constantly strive to improve, feel the spirit, and consciencously make an effort to stay faithful - not ONE...that is safe from the powers of the adversary and therefore could loose their testimony or faithfulness.

3) I have been in wards with "pure mormons" as one Utah-pioneer family mormon called herself.... that did give off the aire of being "better" because her home was filled iwth the spirit from great grand parents down to her children. I once asked her... do you think how your family acts will have any bearing on how you fair on judgement day. First, she was totally ticked at me because this comment came after she was "bragging"... a few days later she called me, tearful... and thanked me because she didnt realize how boastful and prideful she had become. She went on to say that pride can easily be confused as faith... and was grateful I pointed this out. Within a few months she was back to doing it... but she forever changed the way I thought about this.

4. PERSONAL BELIEF HERE _--- But I believe everyone is on a different spiritual plane. And I believe that you will judged on the spiritual level you have obtained. So just because someone doesnt have the depth of knowledge that another has, doesnt mean they are "less" good in the Lord's eyes.

Jesus taught us that anyone who comes to God... regardless of their past, are equal in his Kingdom. The past is just that... the past.

[hordak]

I understand your sentiment, but I wish to state that the view reverses the stigma and makes the "inborn" crowd second-class citizens (in most cases). Joseph Smith may have been a convert, but the majority of the past Presidents of the modern-day Church have pioneer lineage and were born in the faith.

I thought my "generally speaking" statement showed that wasn't the intent.

In the end, 110% of a person's spiritual status before God relies solely upon themselves .

I agree

What i was trying to say is that when you to a church, any church, and meet adult converts you know they are there because they choose to be. Not all lifelong members have that advantage.Some might, even most but not all.

I recall in primary being asked to bring a BoM to a friend who was not a member of the the church. I then realized that my friends were Catholic and Protestant for the same reason i was LDS. We were born into these faiths. I envy those who who seek and find God, I know many do it within the religions or denomination that they are born into but that many do not.

[Maxel]

I thought my "generally speaking" statement showed that wasn't the intent.

My misread; thanks for the explanation.

[Maxel]

Everyone needs to go watch "Charlie"

NO!! I'll cry again!!

[Mageeha]

I'm a black female convert and in terms of dating sometimes I feel overlooked for those born into Mormonism. It hurts. I wonder if I'll ever marry or get asked out on a date by an LDS church member. I uphold all the standards. I've been a member for two years and I'm only 30 and really attractive and really am devoted to my faith - I grew up an Evangelical. I'm sure it will work out soon. 

[Just_A_Guy]

On 4/17/2023 at 1:01 AM, Mageeha said:

I'm a black female convert and in terms of dating sometimes I feel overlooked for those born into Mormonism. It hurts. I wonder if I'll ever marry or get asked out on a date by an LDS church member. I uphold all the standards. I've been a member for two years and I'm only 30 and really attractive and really am devoted to my faith - I grew up an Evangelical. I'm sure it will work out soon. 

Welcome, Mageeha!

[laronius]

On 4/16/2023 at 4:01 PM, Mageeha said:

I'm a black female convert and in terms of dating sometimes I feel overlooked for those born into Mormonism. It hurts. I wonder if I'll ever marry or get asked out on a date by an LDS church member. I uphold all the standards. I've been a member for two years and I'm only 30 and really attractive and really am devoted to my faith - I grew up an Evangelical. I'm sure it will work out soon. 

Welcome.

While there may be those who are less interested in dating a convert I think there is a much bigger issue with dating in general aming the younger generation. There are some pretty amazing women who just don't get married (Sis Nelson for example for most of her life). I can't say I know why but you gotta have faith in the Lord's plan for you, no matter the circumstances in life. All blessings are promised the faithful.

[zil2]

Welcome, @Mageeha!  Amen to what @laronius said, and, since it popped into my head just now and for no other apparent reason, I'll add: if you haven't gotten your patriarchal blessing yet, you might want to consider doing so - they can be an amazing guide for going forward.  (Sometimes folks forget to tell adult converts about patriarchal blessings.  If no one's told you about them, go chat with your bishop. )

[popatr]

I think most or all people have made some good points in here;  for example, I know for a fact that being a lifelong member doesn't guarantee righteousness.  Painfully know it, but not as well as my sister who went through a painful divorce from a stinker of a multigenerational church member.  I also accept it's sad if converts have a hard time dating.  I also accept the power of the atonement for those with "pasts" whether in or out of the church.

But here's another perspective:

People should be free to marry the best person they can find, who will have them.

Imagine this: A guy has two girls who would be willing to marry him. He is equally attracted to both.   Both are equally faithful.  Both are equally kind.  The spirit has ratified that either choice would be pleasing to the Lord.  Etc.  The only material difference between them is that one of them has a generational faithful family who are also good and kind.  Should he blind himself to that fact and pick randomly between them?  Why should he do so?  I'm serious about this, really why shouldn't it weigh on his decision?  We have reason to believe that faithful grandparents will be a blessing to the children, even if we grant that both women are equally knowledgeable and experienced with righteous living (which is in fact unlikely).

What if lifelong chastity is the only difference between these two girls?  Though both girls are celestial at this time and in the future, should he ignore the one difference and pick randomly between them?  Why?  Sin is forgiven but usually has some scars which may not be fully healed until the next life.  (This is my sad but firm testimony)

What if a girl is picking between two guys and everything is equal except one is richer than the other (assume we know that his gains were godly).  Should she ignore that fact and pick randomly between them?  Why?  A righteous man that is maximally capable is a blessing to her and her family.

Now I grant that my imagined scenarios include knowledge that we can't actually know.  Sadly, we are very poor at knowing what choices will really be the most prudent.  Given that, it is forgivable if people occasionally place too much weight on someones membership status.  We at least know that their intentions seems good.

[Vort]

I think I agree with the gist of your post, but I'm gonna respond anyway.

6 minutes ago, popatr said:

I think most or all people have made some good points in here;  for example, I know for a fact that being a lifelong member doesn't guarantee righteousness.  Painfully know it, but not as well as my sister who went through a painful divorce from a stinker of a multigenerational church member.  I also accept it's sad if converts have a hard time dating.  I also accept the power of the atonement for those with "pasts" whether in or out of the church.

But here's another perspective:

People should be free to marry the best person they can find, who will have them.

Agreed. In fact, I go further, and say that a man gets to marry whoever he wants to (who will have him) for any reason whatsoever, however stupid or trivial or racist or bizarre. Same for women. Don't like redheads? Okay, don't marry a redhead. Don't like skinny guys? Don't marry a skinny guy. Stupid reasons, and you may be closing yourself off to the best thing that would ever have happened to you, but okay. You're free to choose, and no one gets to fault you because you want to marry Anna and don't want to marry Betty. The practice of shaming people because they don't want to date _________ people (fill in the blank with whatever) is ridiculous. They get to make that choice, however stupid you think it is. If someone dates a blonde girl just to prove he's willing to date a blonde girl, despite the fact that he's not attracted to blonde girls and doesn't really like them, how is he doing either her or himself any favors? If he doesn't like blonde girls, he shouldn't date them. Save everyone the headache.

6 minutes ago, popatr said:

Imagine this: A guy has two girls who would be willing to marry him. He is equally attracted to both.   Both are equally faithful.  Both are equally kind.  The spirit has ratified that either choice would be pleasing to the Lord.  Etc.  The only material difference between them is that one of them has a generational faithful family who are also good and kind.  Should he blind himself to that fact and pick randomly between them?  Why should he do so?  I'm serious about this, really why shouldn't it weigh on his decision?  We have reason to believe that faithful grandparents will be a blessing to the children, even if we grant that both women are equally knowledgeable and experienced with righteous living (which is in fact unlikely).

The problem with this and other all-things-being-equal scenarios is that, as we all know, all things are never equal. Having great in-laws (or LDS in-laws, or filthy rich in-laws, or same-race in-laws, or Libertarian in-laws) might be convenient or useful or helpful or fun or whatever, and I can see possible scenarios where the in-laws could become deal-makers or deal-breakers. But for the vast majority of situations, it's not going to be the deciding factor. No man in the history of the world has ever had to choose between two women who were exactly as attractive to him except for one little, otherwise merely incidental, thing.

6 minutes ago, popatr said:

What if lifelong chastity is the only difference between these two girls?  Though both girls are celestial at this time and in the future, should he ignore the one difference and pick randomly between them?  Why?  Sin is forgiven but usually has some scars which may not be fully healed until the next life.  (This is my sad but firm testimony)

This is a hard saying. Who can hear it? I have a hard time reconciling either side of this particular debate. In the end, I go back to what I wrote at first: People get to chose whom they want to marry for whatever reasons seem sufficient to them, however trivial or incidental or in the past or whatever.

6 minutes ago, popatr said:

What if a girl is picking between two guys and everything is equal except one is richer than the other (assume we know that his gains were godly).  Should she ignore that fact and pick randomly between them?  Why?  A righteous man that is maximally capable is a blessing to her and her family.

Jesus taught that a camel will pass through the eye of a needle more readily than a rich man will enter heaven. Jesus also warned about "the deceitfulness of riches". I think we would do well to heed that warning.

6 minutes ago, popatr said:

Now I grant that my imagined scenarios include knowledge that we can't actually know.  Sadly, we are very poor at knowing what choices will really be the most prudent.  Given that, it is forgivable if people occasionally place too much weight on someones membership status.  We at least know that their intentions seems good.

The same is true with young women who want to date only returned missionaries. Such young men have shown a willingness to fulfill their Priesthood duties, something a faithful young Latter-day Saint woman will doubtless find attractive. Should we realize that not all returned missionaries are faithful and upright? Yes, just as we should realize that not all young men who forego missionary service are faithless or undutiful. But absent an ability to peer into someone's heart and see their very nature laid naked before your eyes, we all have to depend on proxy measures of those characteristics we most desire. That's just an unavoidable, integral part of living a mortal life.

[mikbone]

Reminds me of one of my favorite stories

While talking to a very helpful, caring, and devoted Filipino hospital nurse.

Nurse:  Well, when I came to this country I had a goal to find and marry a man with 3 qualities: Tall, a full head of hair, and hardworking.  I got 2 out of 3.

Me:  Oh please tell me he is either short or bald!

Nurse:   Shakes head in the negative <in downcast manner>

 

Hang in there.  Don’t settle.

Edited April 20, 2023 by mikbone

[popatr]

True, you can have any criteria for dating and a lot of times you shouldn't feel bad about following your whims.  There are times when you preferences are aimed toward righteousness and yet they will offend or hurt some people.  Just ignore them as pertains to your "big decision".  That said, there are times when your preferences make you foolish and might be a repentance item.

Your preferences might actually be toward evil, and you should try to change them.

Your preferences might be harmless in isolation but ridiculous in aggregate.  You can't possibly find the person.

You might have preferences which are good but ranked wrong.  Eg, she's attractive to you is a good thing but what if you rank it too high and fail to require more important things first?  Like, find out something about her mind and spirit before you kiss her (for heavens sake!)

We should try to be wise and be a little stern with ourselves if needed.

 

Edited April 20, 2023 by popatr

[LDSGator]

On 4/20/2023 at 3:44 PM, mikbone said:

Hang in there.  Don’t settle

I get the joke of course. 
 

But, one should give serious consideration to settling. Sure, have demands where you won’t budge, but everyone in life is a package deal. Having crazy high standards that you refuse to budge on means you’ll be single for life. 

Edited April 21, 2023 by LDSGator

[Jamie123]

I cannot believe this thread was started by me. What the heck was I thinking about 14 years ago? I wish I could go back and shake some sense into my younger self!

[Vort]

3 minutes ago, Jamie123 said:

I cannot believe this thread was started by me. What the heck was I thinking about 14 years ago? I wish I could go back and shake some sense into my younger self!

I often wish I could shake some sense into my present-day self. But I can't seem to get a good grip on my shoulders or around my neck.