Temple marriage for the sole purpose of having sex?

[Guest MormonGator]

16 minutes ago, Grunt said:

Do you believe LDS have a higher or lower divorce rate than gen pop?

Lower, but divorce of any kind is still very sad. That doesn't mean people who get divorced are "evil" or "broken" or defective in some way. Sometimes a person can be the sole victim in a divorce too. It's just overall sad when it happens. I've never been divorced, for the record. 

[Grunt]

30 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

Lower, but divorce of any kind is still very sad. That doesn't mean people who get divorced are "evil" or "broken" or defective in some way. Sometimes a person can be the sole victim in a divorce too. It's just overall sad when it happens. I've never been divorced, for the record. 

I only asked because of the earlier comment about Mormons getting divorced so young.  I misread that as though it were an epidemic.  I'd always assumed the LDS divorce rate would be much lower.

[Guest MormonGator]

1 minute ago, Grunt said:

I only asked because of the earlier comment about Mormons getting divorced so young.  I misread that as though it were an epidemic.  I'd always assumed the LDS divorce rate would be much lower.

I still think it's pretty low. Probably lower than average. The only thing I know for a fact is that the 50% of marriages failing statistic is utter garbage and a total lie. 

[Grunt]

8 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

I still think it's pretty low. Probably lower than average. The only thing I know for a fact is that the 50% of marriages failing statistic is utter garbage and a total lie. 

Do you think it's more or less than 50%?  Do you think that serial divorcees, like my father, have their marriages counted collectively?

[Guest MormonGator]

Just now, Grunt said:

  Do you think that serial divorcees, like my father, have their marriages counted collectively?

Yes. It's only 50% if you count people who have been married multiple times. I think it's much, much less than 50% actually. 

[Sunday21]

In Canada the divorce rate is 40%. The stats alter based on various demographic categories so the more education you have, the lower the rate. Earning your own money and not living with your parents before marriage, lowers the rate. So a women who is over 26 at first marriage, has a university degree, lived on her own before marriage and supported herself economically, has a 26% divorce rate.

[NeuroTypical]

I knew a guy, married in the temple.  His wife died early, he was in his early '60's.  He remarried a year later to someone who wasn't LDS.  He was an open book on a lot of topics, and when we asked him about his pick, he just said "sex is too good to go without".   "Time only" worked for him for wife #2, while he waited to rejoin his first wife.  He told us it was just fine with her too.

I guess that's the main point - if chasingthewind's friends brothers wife is fine with friends brothers reason for marrying her, then who is anyone else to poo-poo the arrangement?

Edited September 3, 2017 by NeuroTypical

[Jojo Bags]

4 hours ago, chasingthewind said:

Would you judge this person if he was out at a strip club?  What if he was with a prostitute?  Or if he was watching pornography?  If so,  why does your judgment suddenly stop when it comes to marriage?

Lust is lust no matter where it rears its head and it should be condemned across the board.

Right on!  This is so very true.  You can still lust after your wife.

[Sunday21]

I think that one can often be less than honest with one's relatives. I can imagine a brother telling his sister that the marriage is just for sex but that does not necessarily reflect reality. After all, the brother probably has quite a few choices for a wife in high density mormonville. Why did he pick this particular woman? She probably has a range of qualities including hotness! 

[Guest MormonGator]

2 minutes ago, Sunday21 said:

I think that one can often be less than honest with one's relatives. 

With good reason. Thank GOD that no one in my family has ever asked or felt the need to discuss their sex lives with me! 
 

[Vort]

2 hours ago, chasingthewind said:

It may be 'false' that marrying for sex is not as bad as extramarital sex but it is still 'unrighteous'.  Would you agree?

No, I would not.

[chasingthewind]

39 minutes ago, Vort said:

No, I would not.

*EDIT* I need to make a correction to my previous post: "It may be 'false' that marrying for sex is just as bad as extramarital sex but it is still 'unrighteous'.  Would you agree?

Edited September 3, 2017 by chasingthewind

[Midwest LDS]

Well the thing is you can't commit adultery with your wife. Do I think marrying somone solely for the purpose of sleeping with her is a good idea? No, I would hope there are many reasons why a person decided to marry their spouse, attraction being just one of those factors. But it is far better to marry than to commit the sin of fornication. The only way I would argue otherwise is if the individual in question plans to divorce quickly after marrying. That would be mocking God. But if he plans on sticking it out, it's always better to obey God, even if it's just because you fear the consequences of sin, than to commit sin.

[Jane_Doe]

7 hours ago, chasingthewind said:

Just recently a female friend of mine told me that one of her brothers got married for the sole purpose of having sex.  What are your thoughts on this?  Personally, I think when someone behaves in such a manner they are showing that they don't really believe in God.  If they really believed in God, they'd believe He knows all of their thoughts, intentions, desires, and motivations.  They'd believe God is the judge of their heart (not just the judge of their actions) and they couldn't get away with denigrating God's holy temple into a place to fulfill their lustful desires.  So this person doesn't really believe in God at all.  They're an atheist at heart all while giving the outward appearance of being a 'faithful member'.  Honestly, if all you're interested in is sex then you'd be better off going to a strip club, finding a prostitute, watching pornography, etc.  Keep filthiness where it belongs instead of bringing it into God's temple.  

 

(Haven't read the thread yet, just commenting on this)

We obviously cannot read this young couple's mind, so we don't really know if this story exactly matches reality.  Therefore, I'm going to approach this question has a purely hypothetical example where we magically know everything--

Getting married solely for sex is a really bad idea.  Marriage is all encompassing, and you should get married for all encompassing reasons.  Things like having friendship, similar life goals, similar standards, good communication, etc, are also super important. (Note: this is nothing specific to temple sealing, but marriage in general).  

If a couple were to get married solely for sex, I would say that they're understanding of marriage and life planning skills are solely lacking. I don't think that means that they are automatically atheist or filthy at all.  

[chasingthewind]

5 hours ago, DoctorLemon said:

Look, there are many worse reasons for marrying than sexual attraction, such as marrying for money, marrying for social status, marrying because your parents arranged a marriage.  Yet, many people get married for these reasons and still have successful marriages that get better and better over time.

If a man and a woman marry in the temple because 1) they are sexually attracted to each other and 2) they get along passably well, they have all the ingredients in the world for a happy marriage.  There is nothing "wrong" or "immoral" or "unholy" about marrying for those reasons, as long as the couple truly commits.

I am not sure what you would consider a "valid" reason for marrying, if sexual attraction is not valid.  And no, marrying for sexual attraction does NOT reasonably correlate with someone's belief in God.

There are certainly worse reasons for getting married.  But so what?  Just because one action is more sinful than another doesn’t make the less sinful action ‘moral’.  At the end of the day, both actions are sinful and God can’t look upon sin with even the least degree of allowance.   

“Happy marriage”?  I am not so much interested in a ‘happy marriage’ as I am in a ‘Godly marriage’ – a marriage that is acceptable in the eyes of God.  There are plenty of ungodly marriages that are “happy”.   I consider the only ingredient necessary for a Godly marriage to be a sincere commitment to follow Christ.  And since Christ commands us in Matt. 5:28 to rid ourselves of lustful desires then a marriage founded on lust fails to qualify. 

[chasingthewind]

2 hours ago, Midwest LDS said:

Well the thing is you can't commit adultery with your wife. 

How do you figure?

[SpiritDragon]

26 minutes ago, chasingthewind said:

How do you figure?

Because by definition adultery involves physical relations outside of marriage. One's spouse is decidedly in the marriage relationship and can therefore not commit adultery within said union.

[seashmore]

8 hours ago, chasingthewind said:

Just recently a female friend of mine told me that one of her brothers got married for the sole purpose of having sex.  What are your thoughts on this? 

 

Well, it's not my husband, so it's not my business. 

If I personally knew the couple in question, I may possibly have more thoughts, but not likely since their reasons for getting married would have no bearing on which kingdom I enter come Judgement Day.

[SpiritDragon]

Let me just say that this topic strikes as being much the same as the mad at modesty topic in that it tries to attach correct reasons for following God's counsel, beyond the reason that God has commanded it to be so and His commands will lead the faithful to happiness and allow them to show love for Him.

In this context, I see someone who is obedient enough to wait for marriage before engaging in sexual relations, which is how it's supposed to work. Certainly getting married, nevermind sealed, just to have sex and then try to annul the action or divorce shortly after would be making a mockery of God and would indeed be inappropriate. However, if the desire for sex was a primary motive to get married, why should this really be any different than a desire to rear a family or to not be lonely or (insert whatever reason you like) as long as the participants are honest and worthy to go through with the ceremony. 

[anatess2]

7 hours ago, chasingthewind said:

1.  An action is 'righteous' if it is in accordance the the commandments of God and 'unrighteous' if it violates those commandments.  Since Matt. 5:28 commands us to rid ourselves of lustful desires then it is unrighteous for lust to be the prime motivator of a marriage.  

2.  There are a lot of people who are religious just because that's the way they were raised.  They go to church, serve missions, get married, read scriptures, etc. not because they really believe in God but because they're just doing what's expected of them. 

1.  I asked for your definition of righteous judgement.  Not the word righteous.  When is judgment righteous?

2.  Sure.  So, why would you call out somebody as not believing in God?  Is that righteous judgment?

Ohhh... careful there.

[chasingthewind]

6 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

I knew a guy, married in the temple.  His wife died early, he was in his early '60's.  He remarried a year later to someone who wasn't LDS.  He was an open book on a lot of topics, and when we asked him about his pick, he just said "sex is too good to go without".   "Time only" worked for him for wife #2, while he waited to rejoin his first wife.  He told us it was just fine with her too.

I guess that's the main point - if chasingthewind's friends brothers wife is fine with friends brothers reason for marrying her, then who is anyone else to poo-poo the arrangement?

Who cares whether the wife is fine with it or not?  What matters is whether God is fine with it.  

Would you feel comfortable telling God on judgment day the reason you entered into marriage was because "sex is too good to go without"?  I sure as heck wouldn't. 

[chasingthewind]

2 hours ago, SpiritDragon said:

Because by definition adultery involves physical relations outside of marriage. One's spouse is decidedly in the marriage relationship and can therefore not commit adultery within said union.

What if someone rapes their spouse?  Isn't that adultery?   

[anatess2]

5 minutes ago, chasingthewind said:

What if someone rapes their spouse?  Isn't that adultery?   

No.  Rape is entirely different from adultery.

[Iggy]

13 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

No.  Rape is entirely different from adultery.

Correct Anatess, rape is ASSAULT.

[chasingthewind]

11 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

No.  Rape is entirely different from adultery.

Can you explain?