Chastity, Young Marrieds, and Pregnancy

[_asbestosman]

It makes no sense to you that one couple which plans for marriage might have a step up on one couple who can't even plan not to get pregnant? I think it shows a difference in attitude and abilities between the two.

On the other hand, I know plenty of couples who managed to stay clean until marriage, but yet had unplanned pregnancies (they planned to not get pregnant for a while, but did anyhow). Are these doomed to marriage too, or did the planning behind tying the knot save them?

[_skippy the dead]

I'm not talking about whether or not the behavior is a "sin", according to LDS theology, of course it is. I am talking about consequences of behavior - natural consequences, not God-invoked consequences. Besides, the "bad" couple got married and took responsibility, and I assume repentance was involved since they were discussing their situation with a spiritual leader.

I just want to know why in two young married couples, both in university, will only ONE couple suffer doom and gloom as a result of the pregnancy? Why will only the "bad" couple have to quit school and take a low paying job? If the "good" couple can somehow manage to continue higher education despite the pressures of having a young family, why couldn't the "bad" couple do likewise?

Duh! Because one couple sinned! ;)

That's the only difference. Apparently it makes all the difference in the world...

I actually think Charity's reply illustrates that she believes this. It makes no sense to us outside that mentality -- she's right -- because it is completely devoid of any sort of logic.

It makes no sense to you that one couple which plans for marriage might have a step up on one couple who can't even plan not to get pregnant? I think it shows a difference in attitude and abilities between the two.

That statement is making a lot of assumptions for both scenarios, many of which are simply incorrect. I have known too many young LDS couples who marry early, with no savings or plans for post-married life (after all, they are encouraged to marry quickly, and not to delay for financial reasons). And as I mentioned in an earlier post, a sibling was in just such a "lamentable" position described by GBH, and has done much better than those with a "difference in attitude and abilities."

[_Ray A]

Was the Virgin birth a planned pregnancy?

[_Scottie]

I'm not talking about whether or not the behavior is a "sin", according to LDS theology, of course it is. I am talking about consequences of behavior - natural consequences, not God-invoked consequences. Besides, the "bad" couple got married and took responsibility, and I assume repentance was involved since they were discussing their situation with a spiritual leader.

I just want to know why in two young married couples, both in university, will only ONE couple suffer doom and gloom as a result of the pregnancy? Why will only the "bad" couple have to quit school and take a low paying job? If the "good" couple can somehow manage to continue higher education despite the pressures of having a young family, why couldn't the "bad" couple do likewise?

Duh! Because one couple sinned! ;)

That's the only difference. Apparently it makes all the difference in the world...

I actually think Charity's reply illustrates that she believes this. It makes no sense to us outside that mentality -- she's right -- because it is completely devoid of any sort of logic.

It makes no sense to you that one couple which plans for marriage might have a step up on one couple who can't even plan not to get pregnant? I think it shows a difference in attitude and abilities between the two.

That isn't what he's saying in the article though, is it?

The article says that they succumbed in the heat of passion. It happens. That doesn't make them irresponsible people, now, does it?

One thing I will argue is the chances of success for this marriage. Shotgun marriages, such as this one, have an EXTREMELY low chance of success. While a typical marriage first, then kids has a much higher success rate.

Now, arguing against my other argument, marriages in the early 20's have a HORRIBLE divorce rate to begin with, so perhaps it's no better or worse whether you wait to have kids, or get pregnant outside of marriage.

Boy, I sure hope that made any kind of sense...

[_harmony]

The point is that there is no reason the "bad" couple would HAVE to quit school and take a low paying job, if the "good" couple doesn't have to, either.

The only difference is the date of conception.

\

The point is that they often will end up that way.

I disagree. The only difference is not the date of conception. The only difference is the date of marriage.

How do you know "they often will end up that way"? Not how do you know that both couples will end up the same way, but how do you know that the "bad" couple will end up in a low paying job, but the "good" couple will not? I'd really like to see your references for that, because every study I've ever about this sort of thing doesn't say that two couples in these circumstances will turn out differently. From what I've seen, they'll both end up in low paying jobs.

And charity, Beastie's private circumstances have no more bearing on her ability to discuss this subject than your private circumstances do.

[_harmony]

Was the Virgin birth a planned pregnancy?

Joseph at least had a trade.

[_Moniker]

I'm not talking about whether or not the behavior is a "sin", according to LDS theology, of course it is. I am talking about consequences of behavior - natural consequences, not God-invoked consequences. Besides, the "bad" couple got married and took responsibility, and I assume repentance was involved since they were discussing their situation with a spiritual leader.

I just want to know why in two young married couples, both in university, will only ONE couple suffer doom and gloom as a result of the pregnancy? Why will only the "bad" couple have to quit school and take a low paying job? If the "good" couple can somehow manage to continue higher education despite the pressures of having a young family, why couldn't the "bad" couple do likewise?

Duh! Because one couple sinned! ;)

That's the only difference. Apparently it makes all the difference in the world...

I actually think Charity's reply illustrates that she believes this. It makes no sense to us outside that mentality -- she's right -- because it is completely devoid of any sort of logic.

It makes no sense to you that one couple which plans for marriage might have a step up on one couple who can't even plan not to get pregnant? I think it shows a difference in attitude and abilities between the two.

No, it makes no sense to assume that a couple that has sex will go on to have a miserable, destitute life. Likewise it makes no sense to assume that those that do plan on getting married go on to have great riches.

[_Ray A]

Was the Virgin birth a planned pregnancy?

Joseph at least had a trade.

I do remember Elder Russell Nelson saying that he got married long before he completed his degree in medicine, and it was a struggle. If memory serves me correctly (I could be wrong), he also didn't serve a mission. I don't think neat stereotypes fit any of these scenarios being discussed. From what I've seen in real life - members don't take much notice. Some stop at two kids, used birth control against FP advice, and women were doing degrees and working while ETB was preaching otherwise. I think they adopted the advice my mission president always gave - "use your heads". People can't packaged.

[_charity]

No, it makes no sense to assume that a couple that has sex will go on to have a miserable, destitute life. Likewise it makes no sense to assume that those that do plan on getting married go on to have great riches.

It isn't the sex. It's the planning part. It's the planning NOT to have sex. It is the ability to organize, to plan, to anticpate problems, to solve problems, to set goals, and overcome obstacles to meet those goals.

[_harmony]

No, it makes no sense to assume that a couple that has sex will go on to have a miserable, destitute life. Likewise it makes no sense to assume that those that do plan on getting married go on to have great riches.

It isn't the sex. It's the planning part. It's the planning NOT to have sex. It is the ability to organize, to plan, to anticpate problems, to solve problems, to set goals, and overcome obstacles to meet those goals.

I'm not detecting a whole lotta passion in that planning.