Only marry return missionaries!

[Guest mysticmorini]

Do you have any idea how offensive that idea would sound to a woman who has a testimony of the truthfulness of the gospel and wishes to share the good news of the gospel to the world?

Don't misrepresent what i said. I don't doubt that there are women who simply aren't interested in marriage and have a desire to spread the gospel. are you suggesting that there aren't women who would not have gone on a mission if a worthy RM would have courted them?

[Wingnut]

I knew more sister missionaries in the field who had someone waiting for them back home that elders who did.

Edit: If you're wondering if I have a personal bias on the matter, it's worth noting that the guy I dated seriously before my mission got married the weekend of my farewell.

Edited March 1, 2010 by Wingnut
added info

[Traveler]

Don't misrepresent what i said. I don't doubt that there are women who simply aren't interested in marriage and have a desire to spread the gospel. are you suggesting that there aren't women who would not have gone on a mission if a worthy RM would have courted them?

I know of a wonderful married couple with a most interesting mission background. Before their marriage the young man was called on a mission and the young woman waited faithfully. When the young man returned the young woman was called on her mission – and so the young man waited faithfully for her return. Upon her return the young man was again called to serve a mission and again the young woman waited faithfully for him to return.

The young man was a native of Brazil and served as a companion to my brother who served a mission to Brazil in the 60’s.

The Traveler

[Guest mysticmorini]

thats a really neat story, I bet thats pretty rare to though.

[Truegrits]

are you suggesting that there aren't women who would not have gone on a mission if a worthy RM would have courted them?

I am sure that has happened, but I have known several young women, who DID have "worthy" boyfriends, and chose to serve a mission. It is not an either/or choice. I think more of our young women would go, if it were not for the extra years they have to wait.

[Jenamarie]

My SIL left on her mission just a month before my brother got home from his. They got married 6 months after she returned.

[Maureen]

Thanks...in my opinion...the word "should" is far from being made to go or as a requirement....

I said "almost a requirement". Your use of "should" tends to have a stricter meaning.

should

• Used to express obligation or duty: You should send her a note.
• Used to express probability or expectation: They should arrive at noon.
• Used to express conditionality or contingency: If she should fall, then so would I.
• Used to moderate the directness or bluntness of a statement: I should think he would like to go.

M.

[Light]

I hope this topic hasn't been beaten to death. I was wondering what people though about the YW's manuals BASICALLY saying "only marry a return missionary" if all YW fallowed this council(which i know they don't) what is a man who joined after his 20's or a man who didn't go on a mission to do? are they left to converts and non members? even with the women who don't fallow the only marry a RM line it seems like they are stigmatized as well. any thoughts?

Could be Howard W. Hunter

What I was taught was you Pray and Fast and ask Father to make your Eternal companion made know to you.

[Moksha]

... say a non-RM does come home with your daughter what would he have to say/said or do/have done in order to get your blessing?

Guy comes in with a gang sign tattoo in his forehead, I would say no way. Guy comes in with a Shaolin Dragon burnt into each forearm and bows to me, I would ask if they are staying for dinner.

I would would want her special someone to treat her with respect, dignity and love. If I have been successful as a father, then my daughter can think for herself.

:)

[Palerider]

I said "almost a requirement". Your use of "should" tends to have a stricter meaning.

should

• Used to express obligation or duty: You should send her a note.
• Used to express probability or expectation: They should arrive at noon.
• Used to express conditionality or contingency: If she should fall, then so would I.
• Used to moderate the directness or bluntness of a statement: I should think he would like to go.

M.

no...my use of should does not have a stricter meaning....I was just trying to understand the way you were implying the statement.

re·quire·ment n.1. Something that is required; a necessity.

2. Something obligatory; a prerequisite.

Edited March 2, 2010 by Palerider

[Maureen]

no...my use of should does not have a stricter meaning....I was just trying to understand the way you were implying the statement.

re·quire·ment n.1. Something that is required; a necessity.

2. Something obligatory; a prerequisite.

I will repeat, I said: Something that is almost required; almost a necessity. Something almost obligatory; almost a prerequisite. :)

M.

[Carl62]

If I were dating a woman and I treated her with respect, dignity and love and the only reason she wouldn't want to get more serious with me is because of some stigma she has that marrying only a return missionary will automatically make for a better and more spiritual marriage, I would not walk from that woman, I would RUN!!! If marrying a return missionary is supposed to be the main criteria and belief for women in having a successful marriage, and since there is probably some temple marriage going on right now as I'm typing this with some bride and her new RM husband, then why is the divorce rate the same in the church as it is in the U.S.? IMHO, and I'm sure I'm going to get flamed for saying this, but I think this is more about women maintaining a certain social image and standard in the church for who they are to marry than what their future spouses spirituality is. Any person, RM or not, can change overnight in any way, shape or form that they choose to. Instead of women worrying about what a man's social status is within the church in finding a mate, why not focus more on how that person is treating you day by day throughout the courtship. I've never once heard of social status, whether it be in the church or in your own neighborhood, being the key in having a successful marriage. It might work for putting on a successful fake front for the family and friends, but for building and maintaining a happy and spiritual marriage? Never.

Edited March 2, 2010 by Carl62

[Blackmarch]

I hope this topic hasn't been beaten to death. I was wondering what people though about the YW's manuals BASICALLY saying "only marry a return missionary" if all YW fallowed this council(which i know they don't) what is a man who joined after his 20's or a man who didn't go on a mission to do? are they left to converts and non members? even with the women who don't fallow the only marry a RM line it seems like they are stigmatized as well. any thoughts?

other than its been beaten to death, my offhand coment would be so that it keeps the RMs on the straight and narrrow...

[Just_A_Guy]

If marrying a return missionary is supposed to be the main criteria and belief for women in having a successful marriage, and since there is probably some temple marriage going on right now as I'm typing this with some bride and her new RM husband, then why is the divorce rate the same in the church as it is in the U.S.?

It's the same among Mormons when you take into account Mormons marrying out of the faith (that number is 24%). But when you look at Mormon-to-Mormon marriages, the divorce rate is about 13%. See here.

Any person, RM or not, can change overnight in any way, shape or form that they choose to.

Sure, they can; but how many do?

Instead of women worrying about what a man's social status is within the church in finding a mate . . .

It's not about social status. It's about whether he takes his priesthood obligations seriously. Refusal to serve a mission without having been honorably excused, and continued justification of that unwarranted refusal, suggests that he either does not understand, or does not care about, the oath and covenant he took upon himself with his ordination.

That should be a major red flag to anyone who wants to raise her children as Mormons and wants the priesthood in her home.

And I still want to know what kind of misogyny leads some of us to refuse to "judge" a young man for his decision not to serve a mission; but pounce all over any female who takes that factor into account when deciding whether to allow that young man to be the father of her children. What's that all about, guys?

Edited March 3, 2010 by Just_A_Guy

[Guest mysticmorini]

to just_a_guy:

i don't think the issue is not marrying a guy who doesn't honor his priesthood, but rather judging that someone who didn't go on a mission isn't currently honoring his priesthood and is therefore not marriage material.

[Just_A_Guy]

Thanks; but I wonder whether anyone can demonstrate that this has actually happened?

And I must say, I think my point about our eagerness to condemn young women who make unjustified personal decisions, while withholding judgment on young men who make similarly unjustified personal decisions, still stands.

Edited March 4, 2010 by Just_A_Guy

[ErikJohnson]

I’ve never had reason to read an LDS Young Women’s manual, and I’ll take John Doe’s word for it that it doesn’t use the language found in the OP. But I’d be surprised to learn that it didn’t encourage LDS women give consideration to a man’s status as returned missionary. (Is anyone going to say the LDS YM’s program does not encourage this?) And I think it’s often difficult to distinguish recommendations from hard rules in a culture where the authority of spiritual leaders is not open to any serious discussion—even when the issue is seemingly trivial (e.g., the choice to wear a colored shirt to church instead of a white one). But that’s just my opinion and experience. I don’t mean to disparage anyone.

Speaking as a former LDS member who never went on a mission—you certainly are stigmatized if you’re a life-long member and don’t have that credential. It’s usually subtle in the context of interactions in a singles’ ward. Where subtlety gets thrown out the window is on LDS singles’ internet sites. RM status was a top question on two of the sites I attempted back in the day. Women can filter out the guys who lack this essential qualification—and they do. Generally speaking, the ones who hadn’t already been married and were still within what statisticians call the prime child-bearing years—these were the ones most inclined to be sticklers. Often you couldn’t get a conversation started when the right box wasn’t checked. By contrast, the 30 and 40-somethings whose temple marriages hadn't stood the test of time and who were left raising the kids alone were usually quite interested. My employment status? That mattered to them. My RM status? Not so much.

The collapse of their standards under the weight of circumstances might have been comical if the circumstances weren’t so tragic. And there are an astonishing number of divorced 30 and 40-something women on those sites, often raising children alone. But I digress.

I’m quite certain I’d still be passing away the time on Sunday afternoons, in the upstairs room in the N. Seattle Stake center where the “Single Adults” met for Sunday school. They usually did a good job putting a brave face on things, but underneath it was a room of lonely, lost people clinging to a culture that teaches them “families are forever” and that blessings are obtained “by obedience.” Praise God He had other plans for my life, plans that included a wife, a child, and another on the way. And I don’t pretend for one moment that I deserved such blessings. God has been amazingly gracious to me.

--Erik

[bytor2112]

I think the whole emphasis on being a returned missionary must be predominately a Utah thing or at least where there are larger pockets of the church with a longer heritage. In Florida, I here the phrase often..."when I was on my mission" but I haven't experienced any stigma for not having served a mission. My last Bishop was not a returned missionary and I know that some of the General Authorities are not returned missionaries...including President Monson.

Sometimes, (probably way too much) church culture is somehow viewed as doctrine.....quite annoying at times. I am fairly certain that most young women are strongly encouraged to marry a returned missionary. Just as Young Men are encouraged to become Eagle Scouts and serve missions. The statistics regarding Young Men that become Eagle Scouts and serve a mission and then later marry in the Temple are pretty impressive.

[Palerider]

I think the whole emphasis on being a returned missionary must be predominately a Utah thing or at least where there are larger pockets of the church with a longer heritage. In Florida, I here the phrase often..."when I was on my mission" but I haven't experienced any stigma for not having served a mission. My last Bishop was not a returned missionary and I know that some of the General Authorities are not returned missionaries...including President Monson.

Sometimes, (probably way too much) church culture is somehow viewed as doctrine.....quite annoying at times. I am fairly certain that most young women are strongly encouraged to marry a returned missionary. Just as Young Men are encouraged to become Eagle Scouts and serve missions. The statistics regarding Young Men that become Eagle Scouts and serve a mission and then later marry in the Temple are pretty impressive.

I agree with you.I have never heard that back here in the part of Missouri I am at. I also have 2 children that attend a singles ward. They drive about 80-90 miles each way every sunday to attend this ward. I have never heard them say they are miserable,unhappy etc. They always have a great time and enjoy being there.

I always say, you get out of it what you put into it.

The young womens program does not tell young women to marry a return missionary. The Young Women leaders may say that. If they do they are just giving their opinion.

Edited March 4, 2010 by Palerider

[bytor2112]

I agree with you.I have never heard that back here in the part of Missouri I am at. I also have 2 children that attend a singles ward. They drive about 80-90 miles each way every sunday to attend this ward. I have never heard them say they are miserable,unhappy etc. They always have a great time and enjoy being there.

I always say, you get out of it what you put into it.

The young womens program does not tell young women to marry a return missionary. The Young Women leaders may say that. If they do they are just giving their opinion.

There are always people that are miserable...BUT why are they miserable? A good bet is that they aren't fully committed to what there doing or the life they have chosen. Not saying that they are unworthy...just not committed. Being a true disciple is not always easy......faith takes time and desire. Sometimes people put in the time but the desire just isn't there.....

Edited March 4, 2010 by Palerider

[john doe]

It does need to be remembered in this discussion when justifying NOT going on a mission that several GA's did not either, that many of them were drafted into military service during wars instead. It's not like they chose not to go on missions, or were not worthy to go on missions at those ages, the situations were more likely that they were pressed into serving their countries. We can play the justification game all day long but when it comes down to it, we have been told in our day that every young man should prepare himself to serve a mission.

[Carl62]

.

Sure, they can; but how many do?

How many RM's change or go inactive after their missions? See what Marlin K. Jensen, a member of the Quorum of the Seventy, has to say about the high percentage of RM's who go inactive after their missions: The Mormons . Themes . The Massive Missionary Program | PBS

[Jbs2763]

frankly is ticks me off that most of the women in the church have this mentality...far too shallow for me...just cause i didn't serve don't mean I aint' 100 times better than some dude that did...

[Just_A_Guy]

How many RM's change or go inactive after their missions? See what Marlin K. Jensen, a member of the Quorum of the Seventy, has to say about the high percentage of RM's who go inactive after their missions: The Mormons . Themes . The Massive Missionary Program | PBS

Very true; I meant it more in the context of positive changes. How many people who were a) raised in full fellowship with the Church, and b) make a life-altering decision to reject the Church's teachings, eventually c) wind up in full fellowship with the Church again with a renewed commitment to living its precepts? Certainly we seem to have some examples of that on this board; but I daresay those folks are in the minority.

I'd be wary. For every male who truly regrets his decision, anecdotally I'd say there are at least five who are just telling a girl what they think she needs to hear in order to agree to share his bed for the next fifty years.

[Guest mysticmorini]

Very true; I meant it more in the context of positive changes. How many people who were a) raised in full fellowship with the Church, and b) make a life-altering decision to reject the Church's teachings, eventually c) wind up in full fellowship with the Church again with a renewed commitment to living its precepts? Certainly we seem to have some examples of that on this board; but I daresay those folks are in the minority.

I'd be wary. For every male who truly regrets his decision, anecdotally I'd say there are at least five who are just telling a girl what they think she needs to hear in order to agree to share his bed for the next fifty years.

there are A LOT of people who reject the church or go inactive at some point in time and return to be strong and faithful LDS. heck, half the people in my ward fall into that category. if what we did in our past was important the savior wouldn't have instituted the atonement. it doesn't matter where a person has been, what's important is where they are going.