Speculation about same sex attraction and addictions


askandanswer
 Share

Recommended Posts

Here are some thoughts I’ve put together on why some people are sexually attracted to people of their own gender and why some people have addictions. I would be very interested in your response and your own thoughts on how/why same-sex attraction and addictions exist and their role in the eternal scheme of things.

I am a believer in an idea taught by Neal A Maxwell that important parts of our life in mortality are a result of what Elder Maxwell called a “customized curriculum.” I believe Elder Maxwell used the phrase customized curriculum to refer to an arrangement whereby in the pre-existence, we were given the opportunity to have some input into choosing and deciding what trials we would have in this life. In making these choices, there may have been several matters that influenced our decision-making. We may have chosen a particular trial or circumstances to have in mortality, because we knew that resolving that particular trial would facilitate the development of an attribute which we knew we were lacking and which would be necessary for our salvation. Or we may have made our decision based on the belief that some trials were more difficult than others, and that resolving a difficult trial would result in more personal growth and spiritual development than resolving a less difficult trial.

Perhaps the most difficult trials to resolve are those that deal with matters that are the most central to the successful operation of the Plan of Salvation. If this is the case, then it would follow, free agency and procreation being central concepts to the successful operation of the Plan of Salvation, that some of the most difficult trials to live with and ultimately resolve, and the greatest amount of blessings and growth that would attach to their successful resolution, would be addictions – inasmuch as it significantly impacts on free agency – and same sex attraction, inasmuch as it significantly impacts on procreation.

(SIDE NOTE Putting these two things together, I guess that the most difficult trials would be combinations of slightly less difficult trials. If that is true, it would follow that the most difficult trials, and therefore the ones most likely to facilitate growth, are those that involve addictions to sexual matters.)

If there is any truth in these ideas, I can readily imagine a situation whereby an individual in the pre-existence, putting together their customized curriculum for mortality, being confident in their ability to deal with significant difficulties, and having faith in their Father in Heaven to help them, and desiring to grow as much and as fast as possible during mortality, chooses the most difficult trials. If its true that the most difficult trials are those that relate most closely to the central aspects of the Plan of Salvation, then some of the most difficult trials would be same sex addiction and addictions. And that’s why they are homosexual or people with addictions here in mortality – because that’s what they chose in the pre-existence in the belief that righteously living with, and ultimately overcoming those particular trials, would add to and hasten their progression more than anything else.

Of course, this is all speculative – apart from Elder Maxwell’s teachings about a customized curriculum, I am not aware of any teachings or scriptures that directly address this idea. However, it does seem to be consistent with some other well accepted teachings. First, to me, it seems more likely that addictions and same sex attraction in mortality are more likely to be a result of choice, not chance, in the pre-existence: it’s hard to imagine a loving Father in Heaven allowing these things to burden His children simply as a matter of chance. We know that our Father in Heaven does all He can to enable His children to grow and succeed, so He is unlikely Himself to impose upon His children anything that could prevent them from growing and achieving as could the burdens of addiction or same sex attraction. For the same reason, He is unlikely to allow an addiction or same sex attraction to develop by chance. However, if some of His children believe that such a trial could enhance their spiritual growth, He could then allow them to choose that trial. Second, there does seem to be some support for the idea that from the greatest trials come the greatest blessings, an idea which the world summarises in the saying no pain, no gain.

For those who have read this far, I would be interested in your thoughts and responses, both for and against, and any improvements to this idea you might be willing to suggest.

Thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In all sincerity, and with no offense intended to your well thought out post, I think that the causes of same sex attraction are ultimately unimportant; what is important is that it is a real thing that exists, and that God commands us not to act or seek to fulfill the desire.  What is important is that we openly acknowledge the existence of these temptations and strive to be a support to those who experience them and still sincerely desire to keep God's commandments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Neal A Maxwell, But for a small moment. Sept 1 1974 BYU Devotional.

The following are a few excepts from the devotional...  I think you may have mis-represented his definition of customized curriculum.  I recommend that you review the devotional, as it is exceptional.

“I believe with all my heart that because God loves us there are some particularized challenges that he will deliver to each of us. He will customize the curriculum for each of us in order to teach us the things we most need to know. He will set before us in life what we need, not always what we like. And this will require us to accept with all our hearts—particularly your generation—the truth that there is divine design in each of our lives and that you have rendezvous to keep, individually and collectively.  ...

If God chooses to teach us the things we most need to learn because he loves us, and if he seeks to tame our souls and gentle us in the way we most need to be tamed and most need to be gentled, it follows that he will customize the challenges he gives us and individualize them so that we will be prepared for life in a better world by his refusal to take us out of this world, even though we are not of it. In the eternal ecology of things we must pray, therefore, not that things be taken from us, but that God’s will be accomplished through us. What, therefore, may seem now to be mere unconnected pieces of tile will someday, when we look back, take form and pattern, and we will realize that God was making a mosaic. For there is in each of our lives this kind of divine design, this pattern, this purpose that is in the process of becoming, which is continually before the Lord but which for us, looking forward, is sometimes perplexing. ...

second trap into which we can fall is the naïveté that grows out of our not realizing that the adversary will press particularly in the areas of our vulnerabilities. It ought not to surprise us that this will be so. The things that we would most like to avoid, therefore, will often be the things that confront us most directly and most sharply. ...

You’re soon going to go out into a world full of marshmallow men. Like the act of putting a finger into a marshmallow, there is no core in these men, there is no center, and when one removes his finger, the marshmallow resumes its former shape. We are in a world of people who want to yield to everything—to every fad and to every fashion. It is incredibly important that we be committed to the core—committed to those things that matter, about which our Father in heaven has leveled with us through his Son, Jesus Christ, and his prophets.”

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, askandanswer said:

 I believe Elder Maxwell used the phrase customized curriculum to refer to an arrangement whereby in the pre-existence, we were given the opportunity to have some input into choosing and deciding what trials we would have in this life. In making these choices, there may have been several matters that influenced our decision-making. We may have chosen a particular trial or circumstances to have in mortality, because we knew that resolving that particular trial would facilitate the development of an attribute which we knew we were lacking and which would be necessary for our salvation. Or we may have made our decision based on the belief that some trials were more difficult than others, and that resolving a difficult trial would result in more personal growth and spiritual development than resolving a less difficult trial.

A13C1F21-B012-4FE3-A6D4-5DB9FDC8183D.thumb.jpeg.afbb17be0cb7bb7c6d2bb5a601702481.jpeg

 

The above is the customized menu that my granddaughter would choose for every meal.

Fortunately, she is not in charge of the menu...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe this thread touches on a number of core principles in the Plan of Salvation.   I believe the single biggest conundrum is that we only have empirical evidence of a very small  part of the plan of salvation - that is the events between birth and death.  Paul makes this point in saying that we see through a "glass" darkly.   The whole or complete truth is beyond our scrutiny, observation and knowledge.  We only have a shadow at best of our pre-existence and what will take place after death.  Revelation concerning our pre-existence and after death existence, I believe by design is vague.  Thus the first great principle that we live by in mortality is faith.  And only faith in Christ can lead to salvation - but from my personal observations - only a small minority of mortals are aware of Christ and the fullness of Christ.  This means that our portion of faith in Christ must propel us through our mortal journey.  We must seek for that which is better than what we currently possess.  I believe this is the great key and secret of seeking after Christ by faith.

Some principles I believe to be true:

#1. All things were and are known from the beginning to the end.  Isaiah 46:10 tells us that not only does G-d know all things – but that he does not keep secrets but reveals truth as a “light shining in the darkness”.

#2. Agency.  There are many debates concerning agency.  I like to think I have a handle on the concept but I have realized that my concepts differ somewhat from others concerning agency.  But I do not believe we can observe or  understand agency in mortality by observing our circumstances between birth and death.  I believe that to understand agency we must have a belief in a pre-existence and an existence that continues after we die.  I believe the exercise of agency in the pre-existence will have direct effects on our mortal experience – and that the exercise of agency in mortality will have direct effects on our post mortal experience.

I would now say something about our mortal experience.  As an engineer I design and implement changes in complex industrial manufacturing systems.  I have experience and have learned the principle of testing before putting critical changes into production.  Almost always I am not testing to determine to reject any change.  In essence I test to determine if the change is ready for operations – and what needs “tweaking” to get something ready.  I have learned that most testing – of necessity – needs to focus at what I will call the extreme boundaries of operational requirements.  For example, if a particular robot is capable of producing 100 widgets – what happens when it is scheduled to produce 101 widgets?  Or what happens when the time is increased – will the robot continue to produce 100 widgets over many consecutive  intervals?  Producing one widget is also a test but not one that will indicate if the robot is ready for production.

I believe the greatest tests of mortality will center around just a few requirements that I believe need to be tested to extremes before we are ready for production (being one with G-d).  One battery of test will center around pride.  Another battery of test will center around anger management.  A third I am sure will center around marriage, chastity, sexual purity and a man and a woman becoming one flesh.  Surely there are more but I will stop here because of this thread.

For anyone walking around in mortality thinking they have “finished” their mortal testing and have passed – my only response is – you are an idiot and are failing the pride battery of tests.   I could say something similar concerning anger management and of course marriage and sex.  Concerning marriage and sex – Jesus once said concerning those whose sins are obvious – let those without sin cast the first stones at the sinners.  I would like very much to cast stones at those that sin or fail the tests I think I have passed.  But that is a failure of the pride battery of testing.  But I will say this.  There is a principle in the plan of salvation called sacrifice.  In order to past the battery of tests for marriage and sex – sacrifice is necessary.  For most (perhaps all) sacrifice is the single most important principle.  Christ is the example of sacrifice when he said, “Not my will but thy will be done.”  (Referring to the will of G-d the Father).  I am convinced that no one will pass the battery of marriage and sex tests unless they willingly sacrifice their individual sexual will and become a saint willing to complete (including sexually) their spouse.  And a spouse for a man is a woman and for a woman is a man.

 

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Mores

While I believe we have a customized curriculum, I doubt we had much input.  I believe it was the Lord's plan and the Lord is the author of it.  Thus the Lord put the curriculum together, not us.

Edited by Mores
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still am not sure how directly the Lord controls the day-to-day minutiae of our lives.  Does a father who sends his child to boarding school specifically arrange for his child to have an obnoxious roommate, or to be hazed, or to be confronted with an opportunity to cheat, or to find a lifelong friend, or to make a connection with a particular teacher that will open particular doors, or to be exposed to a particular life-changing class or book or idea?  Or does the father simply send the child to school, knowing that some of these things are likely to happen and that the overall effect of whatever happens will be positive because of—or in spite of—these events?

I’m not really committed to one paradigm over the other.

Edited by Just_A_Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mores said:

While I believe we have a customized curriculum, I doubt we had much input.  I believe it was the Lord's plan and the Lord is the author of it.  Thus the Lord put the curriculum together, not us.

 

6 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

I still am not sure how directly the Lord controls the day-to-day minutiae of our lives.  Does a father who sends his child to boarding school specifically arrange for his child to have an obnoxious roommate, or to be hazed, or to be confronted with an opportunity to cheat, or to find a lifelong friend, or to make a connection with a particular teacher that will open particular doors, or to be exposed to a particular life-changing class or book or idea?  Or does the father simply send the child to school, knowing that some of these things are likely to happen and that the overall effect of whatever happens will be positive because of—or in spite of—these events?

I’m not really committed to one paradigm over the other.

 

I am thinking that we see keys (types and shadows) of the past and future in the present.  See Ecc 1:9-11   Seeing how we receive and magnify callings - plus all that I understand of agency.  I believe we choose not just to follow but how and to what extent. 

I believe I chose my wife.  I do not believe G-d left me out of the loop to determine how I would serve in mortality.   I believe G-d wants his children invested.  I believe even the name of the church implies the will of G-d.  First the church is called “The Church of Jesus Christ” – because Jesus is the chief corner stone.  But the Church also has “of Latter-day Saints” as part of its name.  I believe because we have a part and say in things.  We sustain our leaders and all things are done by councils starting with the great council in the Pre-existence.  I think Satan is the one the provides a editorship.  G-d works his will through councils and agency.

 

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, mikbone said:

Neal A Maxwell, But for a small moment. Sept 1 1974 BYU Devotional.

The following are a few excepts from the devotional...  I think you may have mis-represented his definition of customized curriculum.  I recommend that you review the devotional, as it is exceptional.

“I believe with all my heart that because God loves us there are some particularized challenges that he will deliver to each of us. He will customize the curriculum for each of us in order to teach us the things we most need to know. He will set before us in life what we need, not always what we like. And this will require us to accept with all our hearts—particularly your generation—the truth that there is divine design in each of our lives and that you have rendezvous to keep, individually and collectively.  ...

If God chooses to teach us the things we most need to learn because he loves us, and if he seeks to tame our souls and gentle us in the way we most need to be tamed and most need to be gentled, it follows that he will customize the challenges he gives us and individualize them so that we will be prepared for life in a better world by his refusal to take us out of this world, even though we are not of it. In the eternal ecology of things we must pray, therefore, not that things be taken from us, but that God’s will be accomplished through us. What, therefore, may seem now to be mere unconnected pieces of tile will someday, when we look back, take form and pattern, and we will realize that God was making a mosaic. For there is in each of our lives this kind of divine design, this pattern, this purpose that is in the process of becoming, which is continually before the Lord but which for us, looking forward, is sometimes perplexing. ...

second trap into which we can fall is the naïveté that grows out of our not realizing that the adversary will press particularly in the areas of our vulnerabilities. It ought not to surprise us that this will be so. The things that we would most like to avoid, therefore, will often be the things that confront us most directly and most sharply. ...

You’re soon going to go out into a world full of marshmallow men. Like the act of putting a finger into a marshmallow, there is no core in these men, there is no center, and when one removes his finger, the marshmallow resumes its former shape. We are in a world of people who want to yield to everything—to every fad and to every fashion. It is incredibly important that we be committed to the core—committed to those things that matter, about which our Father in heaven has leveled with us through his Son, Jesus Christ, and his prophets.”

 

 

 

To accept the idea that our customised curriculum is more a result of God's design than our own, when considering that addictions can be considered as part of that curriculum and that one of the central features of addiction is the loss of agency, reluctant as I am to argue against Elder Maxwell, I have some difficulty with the idea that God would be bless any of his children with a condition that is defined by loss of agency. I think its easier to accept the idea that a person might themselves have chosen such a condition. LIkewise, with the first commandment being go forth and multiply, I find it equally difficult to see how God would be party to a curriculum design decision that leads to a result that makes it so much harder to obey that first commandment. I think God blesses His children with good things, and that He is less likely, acting on His own, to give His children bad things that might help to make them good. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, askandanswer said:

To accept the idea that our customised curriculum is more a result of God's design than our own, when considering that addictions can be considered as part of that curriculum and that one of the central features of addiction is the loss of agency, reluctant as I am to argue against Elder Maxwell, I have some difficulty with the idea that God would be bless any of his children with a condition that is defined by loss of agency. I think its easier to accept the idea that a person might themselves have chosen such a condition. LIkewise, with the first commandment being go forth and multiply, I find it equally difficult to see how God would be party to a curriculum design decision that leads to a result that makes it so much harder to obey that first commandment. I think God blesses His children with good things, and that He is less likely, acting on His own, to give His children bad things that might help to make them good. 

I don't know how things went down in the pre-mortal existence.  My memories of the events have been wiped.  

I agree that is is probably not a good idea to disagree with Elder Maxwell.  He is a very intelligent and wise man, as well as one anointed of the Lord.

We are free to make our own narrative for our pre-mortal existence decisions and actions.  

I just did not think that your explanation of "customised curriculum" reflected what Elder Maxwell was trying to communicate.  

Personally, I view myself as significantly less intelligent and wise as compared to Heavenly Father.  I have made lots of mistakes and will continue to do so.  If I had the option to choose my personal test, I may have attempted to confront my life test as a billionaire, or rock star, or that of Hugh Hefner...

I found the following video this AM.  In my life, there have been multiple times when I have acted as the adolescent gorilla.  Luckily we have a majestic Silverback in the sky to keep us on the straight and narrow.  

 

Edited by mikbone
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, askandanswer said:

I am a believer in an idea taught by Neal A Maxwell that important parts of our life in mortality are a result of what Elder Maxwell called a “customized curriculum.” I believe Elder Maxwell used the phrase customized curriculum to refer to an arrangement whereby in the pre-existence, we were given the opportunity to have some input into choosing and deciding what trials we would have in this life. In making these choices, there may have been several matters that influenced our decision-making. We may have chosen a particular trial or circumstances to have in mortality, because we knew that resolving that particular trial would facilitate the development of an attribute which we knew we were lacking and which would be necessary for our salvation. Or we may have made our decision based on the belief that some trials were more difficult than others, and that resolving a difficult trial would result in more personal growth and spiritual development than resolving a less difficult trial.

If the provided quote from Elder Maxwell is what you are referring to I don't believe Elder Maxwell was referring to our pre-existence and our choosing of specific things that would happen in our lives. This draws to close to predestination rather than being foreordained.

As to choosing a circumstance, there are PBs that specify a person "chose" their parents, and there are PBs that specify the Lord "chose" our parents. In light of this, if the first mentioned is true, then that is a particular circumstance we chose to have in mortality.

I am more inclined to believe what @Just_A_Guy provided. I do not believe we agreed or determined any of our trials or experiences. We simply agreed to come to earth and to accept whatever comes in our lives as a result of that choice. I do not find anything in scripture or words from prophets that highlight choosing in the pre-existence. If you have any other words from prophets I would love to read them.

21 hours ago, askandanswer said:

Perhaps the most difficult trials to resolve are those that deal with matters that are the most central to the successful operation of the Plan of Salvation. If this is the case, then it would follow, free agency and procreation being central concepts to the successful operation of the Plan of Salvation, that some of the most difficult trials to live with and ultimately resolve, and the greatest amount of blessings and growth that would attach to their successful resolution, would be addictions – inasmuch as it significantly impacts on free agency – and same sex attraction, inasmuch as it significantly impacts on procreation.

(SIDE NOTE Putting these two things together, I guess that the most difficult trials would be combinations of slightly less difficult trials. If that is true, it would follow that the most difficult trials, and therefore the ones most likely to facilitate growth, are those that involve addictions to sexual matters.)

If there is any truth in these ideas, I can readily imagine a situation whereby an individual in the pre-existence, putting together their customized curriculum for mortality, being confident in their ability to deal with significant difficulties, and having faith in their Father in Heaven to help them, and desiring to grow as much and as fast as possible during mortality, chooses the most difficult trials. If its true that the most difficult trials are those that relate most closely to the central aspects of the Plan of Salvation, then some of the most difficult trials would be same sex addiction and addictions. And that’s why they are homosexual or people with addictions here in mortality – because that’s what they chose in the pre-existence in the belief that righteously living with, and ultimately overcoming those particular trials, would add to and hasten their progression more than anything else.

Everything we experience in our mortal life impacts our moral agency (i.e. addiction, chastity (which covers hetero and homo sexual orientation), theft, honesty, virtue, etc...) I do not believe people chose to be hetero or homo in our pre-mortal life. The Old Testament then would make our God a very unjust God to make a commandment against homosexuals (death as a result) that they chose to experience, and then to end their life for it. This would be unjust.

I find this type of thought regarding a "planned" mortal probation interesting, but find no evidence for it in scriptures.

21 hours ago, askandanswer said:

Of course, this is all speculative – apart from Elder Maxwell’s teachings about a customized curriculum, I am not aware of any teachings or scriptures that directly address this idea. However, it does seem to be consistent with some other well accepted teachings. First, to me, it seems more likely that addictions and same sex attraction in mortality are more likely to be a result of choice, not chance, in the pre-existence: it’s hard to imagine a loving Father in Heaven allowing these things to burden His children simply as a matter of chance. We know that our Father in Heaven does all He can to enable His children to grow and succeed, so He is unlikely Himself to impose upon His children anything that could prevent them from growing and achieving as could the burdens of addiction or same sex attraction. For the same reason, He is unlikely to allow an addiction or same sex attraction to develop by chance. However, if some of His children believe that such a trial could enhance their spiritual growth, He could then allow them to choose that trial. Second, there does seem to be some support for the idea that from the greatest trials come the greatest blessings, an idea which the world summaries in the saying no pain, no gain.

For those who have read this far, I would be interested in your thoughts and responses, both for and against, and any improvements to this idea you might be willing to suggest.

Thanks

Addictions are a result of our moral agency. An addiction doesn't have to occur in this life and its result is a result from someone choosing (moral agency) to act, and thus now they are acted upon. This doesn't remove our moral agency, but we definitely lose an aspect of it as a result of our choice.

Even our covenants cause a loss of choice. Integrity, a choice, when we accept a honor means I have made a decision to not do certain things, and if I do, I am willing to accept the consequence. (Side note, this is why people within the HCV with BYU are showing a lack of integrity. If you make a choice to accept something as part of a group, we thus accept the consequence. We also see evidence of why their is gnashing of teeth. We made an agreement we have broken and want to continue (using moral agency incorrectly) without consequence. )

We know from scripture that God does everything that is "good" for his sons and daughters. We also know his ways are higher than our ways. I don't think any addiction is by chance. Addiction is a result of choice to partake of something that causes addiction.

Sexual orientation is a different subject. We know they experience something, but we do not know what that "something" is or what that "predisposed" condition is.

I am more inclined to believe that we received warnings, counsel, insight as to our lives through principle. We may even been told, according to the foreknowledge of God what we will experience. This doesn't mean I customized my earth life. Customizing our earth life is too close to predestination.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, mikbone said:

I don't know how things went down in the pre-mortal existence.  My memories of the events have been wiped.  

Coincidentally,( :)  ) my memory of the pre-existence was also wiped, so I also don’t know how things went down in the pre-existence. That’s partly why I’m trying to find out. And that’s also why its such a difficult task. All we can do is construct possibilities from the various fragments and reflections from insights on other matters that are scattered throughout the body of church teachings and doctrines and put together ideas that might, or might not, reflect what really happened. The shortage of revealed teaching on the conditions and circumstances of the pre-existence does make it harder to develop an understanding of what it was like, but that in no way should be a disincentive to trying to develop such an understanding – it just makes it harder and requires the use of a different methodology from the ones that are usually used to gain an understanding of spiritual things.

 

I agree that is is probably not a good idea to disagree with Elder Maxwell.  He is a very intelligent and wise man, as well as one anointed of the Lord.

We are free to make our own narrative for our pre-mortal existence decisions and actions.  

I just did not think that your explanation of "customised curriculum" reflected what Elder Maxwell was trying to communicate.  

I’ve re-read the devotional that you referred to, and related comments, and I agree that my characterization of what Elder Maxwell was saying was not correct. I thank you for that correction it has added to my understanding. In trying to reconcile my idea with the teachings of Elder Maxwell, it occurred to me that one possibility is that what Elder Maxwell was describing was just one approach to curriculum design, but it might not be the only approach. It would not be inconsistent with Elder Maxwell’s remarks, or any other scripture or teaching, to indicate that individuals were involved in designing their own curriculum. Elder Maxwell has outlined one method, but he did not rule out the possibility of other methods.

 

Personally, I view myself as significantly less intelligent and wise as compared to Heavenly Father

 Like you, I am also significantly less wise and intelligent than my Father in Heaven. That fact is a partial motivation to become less unwise and less unintelligent. We are commanded to become as He, and this of course involves seeking to improve our level of wisdom and understanding. I think that studying and pondering and reflecting on His way and His doings, and trying to come to a better understanding of His motivations and reasons for doing is one way of achieving this objective of becoming less unwise and building understanding.

 

I have made lots of mistakes and will continue to do so.  

Also, like you, I have made mistakes. I think the last time was June, 1995, when I chose an apple pie when I should have chosen an apple cake. After a great deal of soul searching and self analysis, I think I can reluctantly acknowledge that sometime in the future there is a possibility that I might make another mistake. :) 

Not that it adds much in the way of support for my overall idea, but I note that more than 15 years after his 1974 BYU devotional, in his April 1990, Elder Maxwell said :"The customized challenges are often the toughest and the most ironical." On the face of it, my speculation that the curriculum some of us may have chosen to construct would be a very difficult curriculum is consistent with these comments. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/17/2019 at 11:56 AM, person0 said:

In all sincerity, and with no offense intended to your well thought out post, I think that the causes of same sex attraction are ultimately unimportant; what is important is that it is a real thing that exists, and that God commands us not to act or seek to fulfill the desire.  What is important is that we openly acknowledge the existence of these temptations and strive to be a support to those who experience them and still sincerely desire to keep God's commandments.

I think that, in general, the pursuit of knowledge and understanding is always a worthy pursuit. It is sometimes a good idea to first pursue and obtain understanding, and then, only after you have it, to assign a value and purpose to that increased knowledge and understanding. 

To the specific point of the value or utility of finding out the causes of same sex attraction, here is what Jeff Robinson said in his address at the 2018 FairMormon conference. Jeff has been running his own private practice for 25 years "assisting individuals experiencing a conflict between their experience of same-sex attraction and their religious beliefs and/or personal values." 

   When I meet with the clients seeking help in dealing with the conflict between their same-sex attraction and their faith, I ask them “If you could get an answer to any question regarding this issue what would your question be?” The great majority of them respond by asking, “Why? Why do I have these feelings?” Much of their confusion, shame, and hopelessness, appear to hinge on their not understanding why they have these feelings. Thinking clearly about cause seems central, not only to decreasing their confusion and shame but also to recognizing what reasonable and credible options are open to them.      

https://www.fairmormon.org/conference/august-2018/thinking-differently-about-same-sex-attraction

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/21/2019 at 2:09 AM, askandanswer said:

I think that, in general, the pursuit of knowledge and understanding is always a worthy pursuit. It is sometimes a good idea to first pursue and obtain understanding, and then, only after you have it, to assign a value and purpose to that increased knowledge and understanding. 

To the specific point of the value or utility of finding out the causes of same sex attraction, here is what Jeff Robinson said in his address at the 2018 FairMormon conference. Jeff has been running his own private practice for 25 years "assisting individuals experiencing a conflict between their experience of same-sex attraction and their religious beliefs and/or personal values." 

   When I meet with the clients seeking help in dealing with the conflict between their same-sex attraction and their faith, I ask them “If you could get an answer to any question regarding this issue what would your question be?” The great majority of them respond by asking, “Why? Why do I have these feelings?” Much of their confusion, shame, and hopelessness, appear to hinge on their not understanding why they have these feelings. Thinking clearly about cause seems central, not only to decreasing their confusion and shame but also to recognizing what reasonable and credible options are open to them.      

https://www.fairmormon.org/conference/august-2018/thinking-differently-about-same-sex-attraction

Science defines intelligence as the ability to learn and change behavior.  In essence, from a scientific point of view, we cannot say "intelligence" or "learning" has taken place if behavior is not modified.   There is no intelligent reason to pursue learning anything if there is no possibility or desire of change in behavior.   (Which is another reason to avoid political or religious discussions with someone that refuses to change their political or religious behaviors)  This is why I am concerned that same sex attractions are not and should not be considered "intelligent" behavior - because the argument is that basic behaviors cannot be changed.

If a person understands why to any behavior - it is easier (intelligent) to avoid triggers that lead to certain behaviors.  

 

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/21/2019 at 4:09 AM, askandanswer said:

Why? Why do I have these feelings?

I would tell them that we do not have an answer as to why, and that the pursuit of such an answer will only cause them more pain, because they will not find the answer they seek.  I would tell them that the sooner they come to terms with this, the sooner they can maintain their focus on what is more important.

I would show them how the answer to why is of no benefit to them.  What will they do with that information?  Suppose the answer is that God imposed it upon them, or suppose it is determined to be a genetic condition, or suppose it is proven to be related to trauma they have experienced; what help will this be?  It will be of no help to them at all.  The only thing that will be useful to them is to decide if they believe in God and the commandment he has issued to not act upon these things.  Once they have made the decision about what they believe, the answer to why becomes entirely irrelevant.

Knowing why would certainly assuage curiosity, but I can't imagine it being actually beneficial.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/22/2019 at 4:23 PM, person0 said:

Knowing why would certainly assuage curiosity, but I can't imagine it being actually beneficial.

Knowing why is beneficial.  The journey to find the answer to Why is what leads us to God.  Why are we here (our purpose) is the first question that leads us to know God.  Of course, people who are born to theist parents may not have had to ask that question to get to the point of faith that God exists.  But for those who have not grown up with that faith in God, the pressing question of "Why am I" is that step that puts them on the path to God.

I posit that the pursuit of the knowledge of why one has same sex attraction also puts people on the path to God because I believe that all truths lead to God.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/16/2019 at 6:33 PM, askandanswer said:

Here are some thoughts I’ve put together on why some people are sexually attracted to people of their own gender and why some people have addictions. I would be very interested in your response and your own thoughts on how/why same-sex attraction and addictions exist and their role in the eternal scheme of things.

I am a believer in an idea taught by Neal A Maxwell that important parts of our life in mortality are a result of what Elder Maxwell called a “customized curriculum.” I believe Elder Maxwell used the phrase customized curriculum to refer to an arrangement whereby in the pre-existence, we were given the opportunity to have some input into choosing and deciding what trials we would have in this life. In making these choices, there may have been several matters that influenced our decision-making. We may have chosen a particular trial or circumstances to have in mortality, because we knew that resolving that particular trial would facilitate the development of an attribute which we knew we were lacking and which would be necessary for our salvation. Or we may have made our decision based on the belief that some trials were more difficult than others, and that resolving a difficult trial would result in more personal growth and spiritual development than resolving a less difficult trial.

Perhaps the most difficult trials to resolve are those that deal with matters that are the most central to the successful operation of the Plan of Salvation. If this is the case, then it would follow, free agency and procreation being central concepts to the successful operation of the Plan of Salvation, that some of the most difficult trials to live with and ultimately resolve, and the greatest amount of blessings and growth that would attach to their successful resolution, would be addictions – inasmuch as it significantly impacts on free agency – and same sex attraction, inasmuch as it significantly impacts on procreation.

(SIDE NOTE Putting these two things together, I guess that the most difficult trials would be combinations of slightly less difficult trials. If that is true, it would follow that the most difficult trials, and therefore the ones most likely to facilitate growth, are those that involve addictions to sexual matters.)

If there is any truth in these ideas, I can readily imagine a situation whereby an individual in the pre-existence, putting together their customized curriculum for mortality, being confident in their ability to deal with significant difficulties, and having faith in their Father in Heaven to help them, and desiring to grow as much and as fast as possible during mortality, chooses the most difficult trials. If its true that the most difficult trials are those that relate most closely to the central aspects of the Plan of Salvation, then some of the most difficult trials would be same sex addiction and addictions. And that’s why they are homosexual or people with addictions here in mortality – because that’s what they chose in the pre-existence in the belief that righteously living with, and ultimately overcoming those particular trials, would add to and hasten their progression more than anything else.

Of course, this is all speculative – apart from Elder Maxwell’s teachings about a customized curriculum, I am not aware of any teachings or scriptures that directly address this idea. However, it does seem to be consistent with some other well accepted teachings. First, to me, it seems more likely that addictions and same sex attraction in mortality are more likely to be a result of choice, not chance, in the pre-existence: it’s hard to imagine a loving Father in Heaven allowing these things to burden His children simply as a matter of chance. We know that our Father in Heaven does all He can to enable His children to grow and succeed, so He is unlikely Himself to impose upon His children anything that could prevent them from growing and achieving as could the burdens of addiction or same sex attraction. For the same reason, He is unlikely to allow an addiction or same sex attraction to develop by chance. However, if some of His children believe that such a trial could enhance their spiritual growth, He could then allow them to choose that trial. Second, there does seem to be some support for the idea that from the greatest trials come the greatest blessings, an idea which the world summarises in the saying no pain, no gain.

For those who have read this far, I would be interested in your thoughts and responses, both for and against, and any improvements to this idea you might be willing to suggest.

Thanks

Why was the blind man born blind?  Same question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/22/2019 at 1:22 PM, Traveler said:

 This is why I am concerned that same sex attractions are not and should not be considered "intelligent" behavior - because the argument is that basic behaviors cannot be changed.

If a person understands why to any behavior - it is easier (intelligent) to avoid triggers that lead to certain behaviors.  

 

The Traveler

Could you explain why you are suggesting an attraction is a behavior.  From a religious standpoint, a behavior is based in either following carnal instincts (which may include both nature and nurture) vs. spiritual influences (which also may include both nature and nurture), choices are made somewhere on the spectrum between the two and acted upon. One can have a purely carnal instinct, an attraction, for example but not act on it, resulting in no bad "behavior".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Fifthziff said:

Could you explain why you are suggesting an attraction is a behavior.  From a religious standpoint, a behavior is based in either following carnal instincts (which may include both nature and nurture) vs. spiritual influences (which also may include both nature and nurture), choices are made somewhere on the spectrum between the two and acted upon. One can have a purely carnal instinct, an attraction, for example but not act on it, resulting in no bad "behavior".

I would be glad to.  As I understand science - nature is instinct which is pre-wired and nurture is learned or acquired.  Again as I have understood scientific studies - certain functions occur without learning and training.  We call these activities elements of the sympathetic nervous system.   For example your heart beats on its own.  Other activities, or behaviors, happen through our cognition or our awareness of a trigger that then generates a learned or nurture response.  An example of this is touching a red hot element in a stove and experiencing pain - thus learning to avoid or fear red things that may be hot, especially related to a stove.  With this example - there is a relationship to attraction but with a reverse effect.  The experience that caused pain resulted in an anti-attraction or repulsion.  

The human brain formulates attractions and repulsions based in cognitive experiences.  This attraction and repulsion is the results of experiments done by Pavlov, Skinner and even Joseph Goebbels.  BTW Joseph Goebbels demonstrated that learned attractions and repulsions could be overridden with introduction to associations that reversed the initial attractions or repulsions.  The specific term for this reverse learning was called "brainwashing".  

Scientifically cognitive experiences are cataloged.  Pavlov demonstrated what is called the lowest cognitive level of learning - sometimes related to stimulus response learning.  Often in school we employ what is called the higher than lowest cognitive level of learning - we call this higher kind of learning "memorization".  

There are also scientific studies that demonstrate that very young children are particular good at learning and that many behaviors actually relate to childhood experiences.  It has even been demonstrated that children can and do learn in their mother's womb before they are born.  These childhood learning experiences are very powerful and can define even adult behaviors.  What a child is exposed to and learn is of primary importance for human development and behavior.

Finely we have learned that stimulus is of critical importance to attraction behaviors.  The human brain releases endorphins a means to enhance behavior.  Sexual behaviors release a very high amount of endorphins and seem to only be rivaled by drugs that can produce a similar effect.  I suggested in a previous post that self sex (masterbation) is an experience that can mess with a child's sexual behaviors and create attractions.  I believe this is why there is the law of chastity.   So that an individual does not become addicted to sexual endorphins released by their brain for behaviors outside of a marriage between a man and a woman.

If you have more questions - I will be glad to respond as best as I understand.

 

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/2/2019 at 5:03 PM, Traveler said:

I would be glad to.  As I understand science - nature is instinct which is pre-wired and nurture is learned or acquired.  Again as I have understood scientific studies - certain functions occur without learning and training.  We call these activities elements of the sympathetic nervous system.   For example your heart beats on its own.  Other activities, or behaviors, happen through our cognition or our awareness of a trigger that then generates a learned or nurture response.  An example of this is touching a red hot element in a stove and experiencing pain - thus learning to avoid or fear red things that may be hot, especially related to a stove.  With this example - there is a relationship to attraction but with a reverse effect.  The experience that caused pain resulted in an anti-attraction or repulsion.  

The human brain formulates attractions and repulsions based in cognitive experiences.  This attraction and repulsion is the results of experiments done by Pavlov, Skinner and even Joseph Goebbels.  BTW Joseph Goebbels demonstrated that learned attractions and repulsions could be overridden with introduction to associations that reversed the initial attractions or repulsions.  The specific term for this reverse learning was called "brainwashing".  

Scientifically cognitive experiences are cataloged.  Pavlov demonstrated what is called the lowest cognitive level of learning - sometimes related to stimulus response learning.  Often in school we employ what is called the higher than lowest cognitive level of learning - we call this higher kind of learning "memorization".  

There are also scientific studies that demonstrate that very young children are particular good at learning and that many behaviors actually relate to childhood experiences.  It has even been demonstrated that children can and do learn in their mother's womb before they are born.  These childhood learning experiences are very powerful and can define even adult behaviors.  What a child is exposed to and learn is of primary importance for human development and behavior.

Finely we have learned that stimulus is of critical importance to attraction behaviors.  The human brain releases endorphins a means to enhance behavior.  Sexual behaviors release a very high amount of endorphins and seem to only be rivaled by drugs that can produce a similar effect.  I suggested in a previous post that self sex (masterbation) is an experience that can mess with a child's sexual behaviors and create attractions.  I believe this is why there is the law of chastity.   So that an individual does not become addicted to sexual endorphins released by their brain for behaviors outside of a marriage between a man and a woman.

If you have more questions - I will be glad to respond as best as I understand.

 

The Traveler

So, my question is do you think attraction is nature or nurture based in your definitions or somewhere in between (I am not talking about the acting on the attraction, just the attraction alone.) If it is somewhere in between, to what degree is it nature or nurture.  

I would suggest that attraction, for the most part is not nurtured.   At least the direction of the attraction, the degree of attraction could certainly be nurtured but whether a boy is sexually attracted to boys more than girls to begin with is nature, that boy was born with that in the wiring just as much as the next boy is born with the wiring to be attracted to girls even before he believes the attractions should exist, there is a period of development where young future heterosexual boys cant stand the idea of being around girls.  They definitely aren't nurturing anything during that time. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Fifthziff said:

So, my question is do you think attraction is nature or nurture based in your definitions or somewhere in between (I am not talking about the acting on the attraction, just the attraction alone.) If it is somewhere in between, to what degree is it nature or nurture.  

I would suggest that attraction, for the most part is not nurtured.   At least the direction of the attraction, the degree of attraction could certainly be nurtured but whether a boy is sexually attracted to boys more than girls to begin with is nature, that boy was born with that in the wiring just as much as the next boy is born with the wiring to be attracted to girls even before he believes the attractions should exist, there is a period of development where young future heterosexual boys cant stand the idea of being around girls.  They definitely aren't nurturing anything during that time. 

I find you opinion interesting - can you provide any empirical evidence that cognitive attractions are completely nature and cannot be "brainwashed" or otherwise by any means or methods modified or changed?

I would go so far as to say any variations or diversity of cognitive behavior or any behavior in any species (especially an intelligent species) - is the result of nurture (learned or acquired) behavior.  Can you give me any empirical evidence to the contrary?

 

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
On 5/8/2019 at 10:30 AM, Traveler said:

I find you opinion interesting - can you provide any empirical evidence that cognitive attractions are completely nature and cannot be "brainwashed" or otherwise by any means or methods modified or changed?

I would go so far as to say any variations or diversity of cognitive behavior or any behavior in any species (especially an intelligent species) - is the result of nurture (learned or acquired) behavior.  Can you give me any empirical evidence to the contrary?

 

The Traveler

If you suggest that attractions have to occur from nurturing alone, that there is no innate attraction, then you would have to say that occurs with heterosexual attraction as well.  Is that what you believe?  

I'm sure there are cases one could find where a child grows up in a place without opposite sex around and when they finally get exposed to the opposite sex later in life there is attraction. 

I have not suggested this is one without the other, at least I didnt mean to say it that way.  I am just saying that there is no reason to suppose that one's baseline attraction is not genetically encoded.  I am not saying whether that could be altered to some degree, of course it can.  If I am genetically predisposed to becoming an alcoholic but I never expose myself to alcohol, likely I wont become an alcoholic even though I have the predisposition.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Fifthziff said:

If you suggest that attractions have to occur from nurturing alone, that there is no innate attraction, then you would have to say that occurs with heterosexual attraction as well.  Is that what you believe?  

I'm sure there are cases one could find where a child grows up in a place without opposite sex around and when they finally get exposed to the opposite sex later in life there is attraction. 

I have not suggested this is one without the other, at least I didnt mean to say it that way.  I am just saying that there is no reason to suppose that one's baseline attraction is not genetically encoded.  I am not saying whether that could be altered to some degree, of course it can.  If I am genetically predisposed to becoming an alcoholic but I never expose myself to alcohol, likely I wont become an alcoholic even though I have the predisposition.  

Allow me to introduce myself.  I am a scientist and engineer and I work in the field of industrial automation, robotics and artificial intelligence.  There is a lot of research into acquired or learned behavior in intelligent species.  Examples are the works of Skinner, Pavlov and the infamous Joseph Goebbels that is considered the father of modern brainwashing.   My research and conclusion is that all scientific evidence points clearly to to sexual attractions and behaviors as learned and acquired behavior.   This is based in studies of the brain (which wires it self as it learns behaviors)  I could go into great detail but our brains alter and change as we learn behaviors.  One cannot read braille until the brain has learned (wired itself) for that particular activity.  The same is true for learning to play a musical instrument or to be proficient in many sports related activities or behaviors.  There is a method of brain development related to learned activities.  If you are old enough you may remember that about the turn of the century it was discovered that sexual behavior (both homosexual and hedersexual) develop differently in the brain.  At first this was touted as proof that sexual behaviors are nature and not nurture.   The problem is that the area of the brain where the development took place is exclusively in the area of the brain for cognitive functions - which mean acquired or learned behavior.  Once that surfaced that fact is no longer referenced.

In all the kingdom of living species that we have studied - behaviors that are nature are all very specific with little or no variation.  When variation or spectrums of behavior are observed it has always been because of specialized learning or acquired development within a species.  The very fact that sexual behaviors are so varied in the human species point clearly to such attractions and behaviors as acquired.  Heavens to Betsy I read a article a while back where a women was sexual accratceted to train stations.  Not to people in train stations but train stations.  Something quite strange is going on there.

My point is that all the scientific evidence points clearly to sexual attractions as an acquired or learned behavior - I am not aware of any evidence (NONE) that clearly point to sexual attractions and behaviors in intelligent humans as a species as purely genetic or nature.  If you are aware of any such evidence - I would be glad to discuss it and explorer it with you as we look for similarities both in other creatures as well as the intelligent human species.  But everything I have seen there has already been research in behavioral science by the likes of Skinner, Pavlov or Goebbels that clearly demonstrate learned and acquired behaviors.  The problem in my mind is that sexual behaviors have become political and not scientific and when political correctness disconnects from science the outcome is never supported by more scientific evidence. 

You asked if I believe that hederosexual attractions are also learned - the answer is yes I believe so.  As proof I would ask to what you are attracted?  Has it ever changed?  For example - when you were a teenager were you attracted exclusively to older ladies in the 30's and 40's or were you interested in girls closer to you own age?  When you got to college were you still interested (attracted) in highschool girls?  Probably not.  It is not uncommon for someone to be attracted to someone else and that they get married.  Then after several "learning experiences" they decide that they are no longer attracted to them and want a divorce.  This is again proof that attractions can be learned and changed.

If you have any evidence that intelligent humans have no control over who they find attractive - I would be most interested in why you think such is possible and how you have come to conclude that such applies across the entire species of humans.

 

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"And finally, I cannot tell you all the things whereby ye may commit sin; for there are divers ways and means, even so many that I cannot number them." Mosiah 4:29.

It is a temptation leading to a sin, nothing more. Why are some people tempted to do or try other things that are harmful to us? Drugs or alcohol, stealing, gambling,, pornography, murder, lying, or...to engage in heterosexual relations outside of marriage? Sin is sin, and those who are a part of the culture of lgbtqixyz, or whatever it is called nowadays, are just pushing an agenda to make their sin not appear as a sin, but as a normal acceptable behavior. The common thoughts are "this is something internal...you were 'born this way', so it cannot be wrong to be 'who you truly are'. These thoughts are real...they are feelings, not temptations...be true to who you are on the inside...it doesn't hurt anyone". To that I say read Isaiah 5, especially verse 20. Many know it is wrong, but want approval from others to make them feel better about their lifestyle choices. I once cared for a man in a nursing home that swore up and down that cigarettes weren't bad for you and didn't cause cancer...that the attorney general warnings were all a scheme from the government or something like that. Well, he died from lung disease.

Perhaps our weaknesses and temptations have been passed on from the pre-existence...or, perhaps God has given them to us to teach us something...to make us humble.  No matter how much we want something to be right, it is still wrong if God says it is, and we must trust in his love and wisdom to truly grow and reach our potential.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share