Would you let your child marry one?

[Guest]

3 hours ago, Sunday21 said:

An interesting question is: Would you prefer that your daughter marry a nonlds or not marry at all? The gender imbalance makes this an issue.

In my ward and in any ward that I have visited, there seem to be two or three times the number of young women to young men. Actually in my ward the ratio is 6:1.

 I used to assume that the young men were on missions but when I talk to ward leaders, this is not the case. The young men are inactive. I realize that this may not be the case where you live but the situation here is concerning. I hope these young women are preparing themselves for the job market.

A very difficult question that is increasingly a problem.  I honestly don't know the answer to this.  

On one hand, if my daughter marries a non-LDS person, there is an opportunity cost in that she likely forecloses on the possibility of meeting a good LDS man in the future.  I also know that Church leaders have said, if you are a woman who cannot marry in the temple because you honestly did not have the opportunity in this life, you will have a chance for a temple marriage in the next life.  I wonder if this is waived if you settle for non-LDS?  (I honestly don't know the answer to this).  Finally, as my mom found out the hard way, it can be really, really hard to live gospel standards when you are married to someone who does not live gospel standards.  My mom says, at one point when I was a small boy, there were so many beer cans around that I used to kill my mom's plants by watering them with leftover beer courtesy of my dad.   My mom would have to constantly be on the lookout for pornographic magazines left laying around by my dad so we wouldn't see them (my dad eventually did have an affair, ending the marriage).  It is really kind of a miracle I am here, active, clothed and in my right mind today.

On the other hand, I also understand that asking a single LDS sister to remain alone and celibate for life is a very hard thing to ask, and even if a non-temple marriage is by definition temporary, perhaps it could lead to at least some happiness?  And there is always the chance that the husband could wind up joining the Church in this life or the next (although statistically, I think only one in eight do this).

So I don't know the answer to this question.  It is a real problem we are facing as a church, however.

Edited November 3, 2017 by DoctorLemon

[estradling75]

42 minutes ago, Grunt said:

The first two I understood.  I just wouldn't consider the marriage successful until that occurs.  The second is odd to me, but wouldn't it not be considered successful, or even sealed, until accepted after death in the spirit world, the same as baptism?

In this life it is more about Hope then guarantees.  For example a couple could get sealed and then later divorced.. that can not be considered a "successful" marriage by any definition although people might have one time thought so.

Hope ultimately is centered in Christ and his promises that if you are true and faithful no promised blessing will be denied.  Thus the Hope that while in this life some doors will be closed to us He will open them in his time and in his way.  Hope that even when we make mistakes and slam the door on ourselves that we can repent and He will open them (again in his own time and in his own way).

It is this Hope that those who can't find a spouse cling to, this Hope that those that marry Non Members cling to, this Hope that those whose marriage fell apart cling to, this Hope that those whose marriage is going strong cling to.

As parents we want the "know" that are kids are going to be successful, but we can't.  We can only "Hope" and hoping is easier when we can see cause for it with our own eyes

[Jane_Doe]

4 hours ago, Grunt said:

As LDS, how can you have a successful marriage with someone who is not LDS?

I totally think so

1 hour ago, Grunt said:

Isn't the goal to have an eternal marriage?  Unless I'm not understanding, which is typical, anything less than a Temple sealing isn't successful, right?

A sealing is only part of a successful marriage, and may happen when the marriage starts (aka getting sealed on your wedding day).  Other parts include respecting God, each other, building love and communication, etc.  None of these are just static from the start, but should continue to grow throughout the marriage/life.  For me, being in a successful interfaith marriage is about acknowledging this continual growth and hope in Christ.  

Edited November 3, 2017 by Jane_Doe

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, Jane_Doe said:

I totally think so

I hope I have not offended you with my fairly blunt comments on this subject (and if I have I apologize).  It sounds like you have had a very good and successful marriage with someone who is non-LDS.  My comments are coming from my observations of my mother's marriage to a non-LDS man (my father) which was much less successful and cause for great pain in my mother's life.

Edited November 3, 2017 by DoctorLemon

[Jane_Doe]

1 minute ago, DoctorLemon said:

I hope I have not offended you with my fairly blunt comments on this subject.  It sounds like you have had a very good and successful marriage with someone who is non-LDS.  My comments are coming from my observations of my mother's marriage to a non-LDS man (my father) which was much less successful and cause for great pain in my mother's life.

Again, value, communication, and respect are important.  My husband it's LDS, but he's my biggest supporter in my faith.  We stand together that God is important and honoring Him, even though are views about Him and non-identical.  We're a united from on lifestyle and values thing together.  When something comes up, we talk about it.  

I'm a big proponent of it is possible to have a successful interfaith marriage, but definitely not something to be undertaken likely (just like any other marriage). 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Jane_Doe said:

Again, value, communication, and respect are important.  My husband it's LDS, but he's my biggest supporter in my faith.  We stand together that God is important and honoring Him, even though are views about Him and non-identical.  We're a united from on lifestyle and values thing together.  When something comes up, we talk about it.  

I'm a big proponent of it is possible to have a successful interfaith marriage, but definitely not something to be undertaken likely (just like any other marriage). 

And those were elements that were absolutely missing in my parents' marriage.  

[Jane_Doe]

5 minutes ago, DoctorLemon said:

And those were elements that were absolutely missing in my parents' marriage.  

Now was it because the different churches they attended or also because of something more?

I'm not particularly ragging on your parent's marriage at all-- that's TOTALLY not my point.  Just that there's a lot of things that go into a marriage.  I personally would be totally ok having my daughter marry a non-LDS guy who was her best friend, respected her, they were part of the same team, communicated well, even if they had different views on the particulars about God.  I would much rather have that (and view it much more successful) than having her married to an LDS guy who abused her despite shared beliefs about God. 

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, Jane_Doe said:

Now was it because the different churches they attended or also because of something more?

I'm not particularly ragging on your parent's marriage at all-- that's TOTALLY not my point.  Just that there's a lot of things that go into a marriage.  I personally would be totally ok having my daughter marry a non-LDS guy who was her best friend, respected her, they were part of the same team, communicated well, even if they had different views on the particulars about God.  I would much rather have that (and view it much more successful) than having her married to an LDS guy who abused her despite shared beliefs about God. 

No.  My father hated the Church and thought religion in general was all a bunch of "hogwash" (I still don't know for sure he even believes in God), but he was way too passive to prevent my mother or his children from going to Church.  He would roll his eyes at the Church and go on living his very sinful lifestyle (alcohol, pornography, and eventually affairs).  Over many years, my mother and father grew further and further apart until they could barely stand to look at one another, at which point my father got a mistress and the marriage ended.

I absolutely agree with you regarding abusers, too, though I would question if someone could be abusive and truly be LDS, since habitual abusers can (and should be) excommunicated from the Church (and they would be better off eternally being excommunicated).  If someone should be excommunicated but hasn't been yet because they have not confessed, can it really be said they are still LDS?  

Edited November 3, 2017 by DoctorLemon

[Jane_Doe]

2 minutes ago, DoctorLemon said:

No.  My father hated the Church and thought religion in general was all a bunch of "hogwash" (I still don't know for sure he even believes in God), but he was way too passive to prevent my mother or his children from going to Church.  He would roll his eyes at the Church and go on living his very sinful lifestyle (alcohol, pornography, and eventually affairs).  Over many years, my mother and father grew further and further apart until they could barely stand to look at one another, at which point my father got a mistress and the marriage ended.

My heart goes out to you and your family.  That's a tough road to go along.

Having disdain (or love) for God is a basic value thing. Your parents had a big discrepancy on this basic value and refused to respect each other views.  That's bigger than disagreeing which church is True.   And then there's all the other big value issues on top of it.  

[Midwest LDS]

I think you asked a very interesting question @prisonchaplain. I, as many others have already stated, would want my daughter to marry a good, active LDS man in the temple. Too me, interfaith marriage between two people active in their faith is, generally speaking, a bad idea. Can it work? Absolutely and we have some on this site who show that it can. But it adds an extremely complicated argument to your life especially if you have children. I would be morally opposed to raising my children as anything other than LDS. How would an active Catholic or Pentacostal, or Jewish wife feel about that decision? Undoubtedly, they would be upset and it would lead to constant friction in our marriage. Marriage can be difficult enough without adding crises of faith to the equation too. In addition, what if religion isn't important to your spouse? Maybe they don't care where you take the kids on Sunday, but they want to use pornography, or go gambling in Vegas, or go out drinking every weekend. You and your kids will be affected by those attitudes and it will make following Christ that much more difficult. While I would welcome a man who loves my daughter into my family even if he wasn't Mormon, I would be praying for and hoping for his conversion the entire time.  

Edited November 3, 2017 by Midwest LDS

[Guest MormonGator]

It's such a tough question. Life is hardly linear and it's very complicated. You marry at age 22 thinking and praying that the other person will never change into something we don't like. Maybe a good little Jewish girl at age 22 (literally pulling religions out of the sky here. Could be Jewish/Catholic/LDS/Hindu/Protestant) will discover Christ at age 40. Maybe a Protestant at age 22 will become an atheist at age 30.  Maybe an LDS man at age 50 will enter into the Catholic church at 51. Maybe a Catholic will become a LDS in his early thirties like I did.  

 The truth is that we don't know what the future holds. 

Edited November 3, 2017 by MormonGator

[NeuroTypical]

True story: I was a registered democrat in Utah in the '80's.  

[Guest MormonGator]

1 minute ago, NeuroTypical said:

True story: I was a registered democrat in Utah in the '80's.  

Did you know the other one? 

[zil]

31 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

True story: I was a registered democrat in Utah in the '80's.  

[Guest]

32 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

True story: I was a registered democrat in Utah in the '80's.  

I believe Matthew 5:22 is applicable.  

[Guest MormonGator]

1 minute ago, DoctorLemon said:

I believe Matthew 5:22 is applicable.  

Or Ecclesiastes 10:2. 

[Guest]

38 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

True story: I was a registered democrat in Utah in the '80's.  

To be fair, many of the Democrats of the 1980s would be considered center-right today.

[Guest MormonGator]

Just now, DoctorLemon said:

To be fair, many of the Democrats of the 1980s would be considered center-right today.

For sure. The majority of the Reagan democrats have either switched to the GOP or are DINOs.  

[Traveler]

 

As always @prisonchaplain puts forth interesting and critically important questions.  There are several principles that I think are important for discussion in this thread.  I will give my best insights:

First – The terms and understanding of “accepting Christ” are many and varied.  It is my understanding that Christ is such a profound and strong eternal influence for everyone – that everybody is going to accept Christ at some level.  I believe that even Satan and his devils accept and even obey Christ.  Otherwise Christ would not have been able to cast out devils as the scriptures testify.  We as also told, in scripture, that every knee will bow and every tongue confess that Jesus is the Christ.  I believe that those that think that by bowing down and confessing the Christ assures them of forgiveness and eternal divine bliss – are in for a big surprise – especially if they are not obedient to his commandments – thinking such is of some relative unimportance.   Who can say they have never been disobedient? Or that they have repented and disobedience is not applicable?

Second – I believe the most important principle that governs man is G-d given freewill or divine agency.  But I do not believe agency is just a choice.  I believe that agency requires that a person be taught correct principles first and second – having been taught correct principles that they govern (or choose for) themselves.  There are a lot of debates and discussions about freewill verses determinism.  If the parameters are limited to the circumstances between birth and death (as many Traditional Christians claim) – it is obvious to me that freewill is an illusion.  But if we understand a pre-birth existence that included an expression of agency and freewill – we can understand this life is an extension of our freewill or agency at some time before.

Finally – I am not the decider for my children that have become accountable (which is all of them now).  I have taught them what I believe are correct principles.  Not just by logic but by example.  When I was dating – I dated many different ladies.  Mostly I loved and enjoyed first dates – for me first dates were the most fun.  But as I realized that the fun stuff was not as important as choosing a wife – I was much more selective in courting as a preparation for marriage.   Not only did I consider being selective in who I would marry – I also became selective with myself to ensure that I was worthy and compatible for what I desired in a wife.

If a lady I was dating was instrumental in convincing me that there is a better approach to marriage that by being actively engaged in LDS principles and causes – I would have joined with her.  Otherwise I would expect her to join with me.  Without a consensus without regret there would be no marriage covenant that I would avow.  This principle I attempted to teach to my children – both by logic and example.  And I encouraged that they do the same with their children.

What I have discovered is that my children have not understood the principles as I have – and they have governed their lives differently than I have.  But I have also discovered that it is best that I support their applications rather than for me to correct them according to my standards.  This is not to say that I will not voice my opinion – but that I make it clear to them that I love them and support them in their decisions. 

I believe G-d so treats all mankind as his children – that he supports us and loves us even when we make decisions contrary to his wisdom – which we all do.  And he forgives us – even when we do not forgive ourselves he allows it.  This is preciously why I do not believe in the Hell many non-LDS tout.  I just do not believe someone is forever damned for some minor mistake that they were born into in this mortal life.

When it comes to religion – I believe I can learn from devout believers of just about any religion.  I have even encountered an honest to gosh Satan worshiper.  A most interesting chap that I would welcome to my home on my terms (as with anybody) and I will be dog-oned that I was able to learn a few things from him but for sure I would not marry a lady that was so devoted.

 

The Traveler

[prisonchaplain]

Gender imbalance has been raised as an issue. It used to be a common joke in our churches that AG stood for the Assemblies of Girls. Women tend to be more active and engaged in spirituality than men. In secular society 60% of college students are female. One sociologist recently wrote an article that she said she did not want to--one admitting that grandpa was right--men are not marrying now because social media allows them to "get the milk for free, thus avoiding paying for the cow." For those not familiar with this old saying (Why by the cow when the milk is free), this means they can enjoy adult activity without marriage--or even much of a relationship. So, abortions and divorce are down--because marriage itself is down.  I married at 31. In the 1990s 85% of my age peers were already married. I'm hearing that today I would probably have been right at 50%.  And so, the question:  Is celibacy the preferred option for those who cannot find a marriage partner within the faith? For most traditional Christians the answer is yes--and, churches are making new efforts to welcome and engage older singles. I understand that LDS theology about marriage makes celibacy are problematic solution. Thoughts?

Edited November 3, 2017 by prisonchaplain

[The Folk Prophet]

25 minutes ago, prisonchaplain said:

And so, the question:  Is celibacy the preferred option for those who cannot find a marriage partner within the faith? For most traditional Christians the answer is yes--and, churches are making new efforts to welcome and engage older singles. I understand that LDS theology about marriage makes celibacy are problematic solution. Thoughts?

You're going to get answers all over the map on this one.

But...I would dare say that, in my view, the more common thinking would tend towards: Yes.

Edit: I realized I should expound. We are taught and believe that no faithful member who does their best will be denied any eternal blessings, including eternal marriage. That means that if not in this life, then in the next (though...as an aside, that means that at some point work for the dead will have to be done for said single individuals after it is revealed to whom they should be eternally sealed...but I digress....). I think that the idea of marrying outside the eternal covenant would likely most commonly be viewed as an eternal choice (with the outside hope that it might change at some time in this life or the next). Don't get me wrong. I am not saying that those who opt to marry outside the faith when no other options are available are doomed. But the idea of marrying outside the faith being a choice against eternal marriage is so ingrained in our thinking that I expect that most often celibacy while continuing to seek for an eternal mate within the faith would be the perceived ideal as to the best path to not being denied any blessings when all is said and done.

Edited November 3, 2017 by The Folk Prophet

[Traveler]

1 hour ago, prisonchaplain said:

Gender imbalance has been raised as an issue. It used to be a common joke in our churches that AG stood for the Assemblies of Girls. Women tend to be more active and engaged in spirituality than men. In secular society 60% of college students are female. One sociologist recently wrote an article that she said she did not want to--one admitting that grandpa was right--men are not marrying now because social media allows them to "get the milk for free, thus avoiding paying for the cow." For those not familiar with this old saying (Why by the cow when the milk is free), this means they can enjoy adult activity without marriage--or even much of a relationship. So, abortions and divorce are down--because marriage itself is down.  I married at 31. In the 1990s 85% of my age peers were already married. I'm hearing that today I would probably have been right at 50%.  And so, the question:  Is celibacy the preferred option for those who cannot find a marriage partner within the faith? For most traditional Christians the answer is yes--and, churches are making new efforts to welcome and engage older singles. I understand that LDS theology about marriage makes celibacy are problematic solution. Thoughts?

 

We LDS are taught the principle of Temple (eternal) marriage.  That this is the only marriage that will exist beyond the grave.  But we are given the right to choose for ourselves - thus some marry outside the temple, some marry non-LDS and some remain celibate.  All variants, according to doctrine, are incomplete and are not Celestial (meaning eternal as G-d is eternal).  Our Church serves and covenants are open to all according to their desire to obey corresponding covenants.  Our obligation as members is to speak truth and direct obedience to covenants but with the caveat that only temple marriages endure.  If one makes a covenant until death they are not rejected or denied the sacrament – currently.

 

The Traveler

[Sunday21]

4 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

True story: I was a registered democrat in Utah in the '80's.  

Sorry to hear that you have strayed! Come back. All will be forgiven. 

[Sunday21]

3 hours ago, prisonchaplain said:

Gender imbalance has been raised as an issue. It used to be a common joke in our churches that AG stood for the Assemblies of Girls. Women tend to be more active and engaged in spirituality than men. In secular society 60% of college students are female. One sociologist recently wrote an article that she said she did not want to--one admitting that grandpa was right--men are not marrying now because social media allows them to "get the milk for free, thus avoiding paying for the cow." For those not familiar with this old saying (Why by the cow when the milk is free), this means they can enjoy adult activity without marriage--or even much of a relationship. So, abortions and divorce are down--because marriage itself is down.  I married at 31. In the 1990s 85% of my age peers were already married. I'm hearing that today I would probably have been right at 50%.  And so, the question:  Is celibacy the preferred option for those who cannot find a marriage partner within the faith? For most traditional Christians the answer is yes--and, churches are making new efforts to welcome and engage older singles. I understand that LDS theology about marriage makes celibacy are problematic solution. Thoughts?

Celibacy for women is fine assuming a lack of opportunity to marry. Women are not expected to lower their standards to marry. Most men, baring exceptional circumstances, are expected to marry.

[mordorbund]

 

17 minutes ago, Sunday21 said:

5 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

True story: I was a registered democrat in Utah in the '80's.  

Sorry to hear that you have strayed! Come back. All will be forgiven. 

Doc? Is that you?