Utah Mormons have serious porn problems ...

[_Mister Scratch]

I have come away with an entirely different perception. I don't recall him ever saying a positive thing about the Church, and if he had, it pales in comparison to his frequent gripes and complaints. Also, his OP on this thread came across at best as a backhanded compliment, and when you consider the audience to whom he addressed his quip (i.e. relatively and predominately hostile to the Church), Rollo's alleged genuine love doesn't quite come shining through to me. I know that were I one of his loved one's, I certainly wouldn't appreciate him gossiping and complaining behind my back like he has with the Church over the last year or so.

Likewise, I don't recall you ever A) saying a positive thing about the Church, nor B) doing anything positive on the Church's behalf, nor C) representing the Church in a positive way. I know that if I were your bishop, I certainly wouldn't appreciate the sort of armchair psychiatrist crap that you dole out on a regular basis, since your judgmentalism, hubris, and arrogance reflect badly on the Church.

[_rcrocket]

I have come away with an entirely different perception. I don't recall him ever saying a positive thing about the Church, and if he had, it pales in comparison to his frequent gripes and complaints. Also, his OP on this thread came across at best as a backhanded compliment, and when you consider the audience to whom he addressed his quip (i.e. relatively and predominately hostile to the Church), Rollo's alleged genuine love doesn't quite come shining through to me. I know that were I one of his loved one's, I certainly wouldn't appreciate him gossiping and complaining behind my back like he has with the Church over the last year or so.

Likewise, I don't recall you ever A) saying a positive thing about the Church, nor B) doing anything positive on the Church's behalf, nor C) representing the Church in a positive way. I know that if I were your bishop, I certainly wouldn't appreciate the sort of armchair psychiatrist crap that you dole out on a regular basis, since your judgmentalism, hubris, and arrogance reflect badly on the Church.

You really scored with that one, Scratch! Scratch one Wade Englund!

Oh the moronity of it all.

Scratch: Pick a topic in church history and lets the two of us go at it. You are the real enemy of the Church here, not poor Wade.

[_Bond...James Bond]

I have come away with an entirely different perception. I don't recall him ever saying a positive thing about the Church, and if he had, it pales in comparison to his frequent gripes and complaints. Also, his OP on this thread came across at best as a backhanded compliment, and when you consider the audience to whom he addressed his quip (i.e. relatively and predominately hostile to the Church), Rollo's alleged genuine love doesn't quite come shining through to me. I know that were I one of his loved one's, I certainly wouldn't appreciate him gossiping and complaining behind my back like he has with the Church over the last year or so.

Likewise, I don't recall you ever A) saying a positive thing about the Church, nor B) doing anything positive on the Church's behalf, nor C) representing the Church in a positive way. I know that if I were your bishop, I certainly wouldn't appreciate the sort of armchair psychiatrist crap that you dole out on a regular basis, since your judgmentalism, hubris, and arrogance reflect badly on the Church.

You really scored with that one, Scratch! Scratch one Wade Englund!

Oh the moronity of it all.

Scratch: Pick a topic in church history and lets the two of us go at it. You are the real enemy of the Church here, not poor Wade.

I second that (the debate part, not the enemy of the church part).

Bond

[_Mister Scratch]

I have come away with an entirely different perception. I don't recall him ever saying a positive thing about the Church, and if he had, it pales in comparison to his frequent gripes and complaints. Also, his OP on this thread came across at best as a backhanded compliment, and when you consider the audience to whom he addressed his quip (i.e. relatively and predominately hostile to the Church), Rollo's alleged genuine love doesn't quite come shining through to me. I know that were I one of his loved one's, I certainly wouldn't appreciate him gossiping and complaining behind my back like he has with the Church over the last year or so.

Likewise, I don't recall you ever A) saying a positive thing about the Church, nor B) doing anything positive on the Church's behalf, nor C) representing the Church in a positive way. I know that if I were your bishop, I certainly wouldn't appreciate the sort of armchair psychiatrist crap that you dole out on a regular basis, since your judgmentalism, hubris, and arrogance reflect badly on the Church.

You really scored with that one, Scratch! Scratch one Wade Englund!

Oh the moronity of it all.

Scratch: Pick a topic in church history and lets the two of us go at it. You are the real enemy of the Church here, not poor Wade.

First I'd like you to live up to your promise about delivering that MMM letter. What do you say, P.?

[_Ray A]

TD, thanks for your clarifications and a little lesson in pre-history. I had read those things but your post was a reminder. Doesn't quite fit the Garden of Eden story, but that's mythology anyway.

Similarly, the urge to screw every female that walks by was at one time obviously beneficial (and still is in most animals). But over time, it became clear offspring benefitted by having a father hence male parental investment and the bonding of males with females. TODAY, if a man decides to ^%$# every woman who walks by, he is not acting in the best interest of offspring or community. Does that make sense?

No, he certainly isn't. Especially if she's someone else's wife.

I'm NOT in any way suggesting we have to change our biology. I'm saying nature will hold onto the things that work and those things that are no longer necessary will diminish and disappear. I'm saying what is hardwired in animals is less so in conscious humans. You agree with this?

It appears so, since humans are also the only species which is aware of forthcoming death, so we obviously have some cranial advantage, if you can call foreseeing your own eventual death "advantage". We've evolved beyond animals significantly, yes, and I guess there will be more evolution, which some people seem to think the Indigo children are already doing. I'm not sure how they feel about marriage/relationships.

I very much wonder about the future of relationships. OTOH, there is no longer a need for them. Women do not need to have a relationship with a man to have children or provide for them. Men no longer need women to be sexually stimuated and release seed! (Trying to keep it PG)! :-) So, the NEED for relationship seems to me, will diminish over time.

OTOH, in my opinion, it is an amazing ability for humans to partner long term and through intimacy new emotions can emerge and a emotional bond can develop unlike anything in our known universe. The intense sharing and compassion that 'potentially' come through long term partnering is certainly an advancement in the human. in my opinion, this relationship comes NOT from necessity but from a depth of desire which is certainly transformational.

So, in terms of today, again, I'm suggesting that men who have moved beyond the primitive urges are rare but more and more I am aware of those who have done just this. It is not a moral thing, in is a deepening. It is not repression but release. Not a fight against Satan, but a moving beyond something less rewarding, to something much more meaningful, fulfilling, pleasurable and enjoyable.

For those who find the right partner, perhaps. I look at my youngest daughter now, she has had several boyfriends but no desire for long term relationships. I think this is the trend with many young people. Relationships can be rewarding, but I see so many difficulties in them, arguments, disagreements, and when they've butted heads for too long, they split. People are complex with varying needs and desires, and to find that rewarding long term relationship seems one hell of a challenge. I know a lot about my daughter's friends as well, all teenagers, and they're not by and large interested in long term relationships. I kind of wonder if we're going in the direction you hope. I do have many Mormon friends though who have had long term marriages, one was on the verge of divorce before they joined the church, and 30 years later they're still together, so I think religion does have a stabilising factor in some marriages, but what I see in society mainly is a trend to individualism rather than commitment.
However, last time I checked I saw the LDS US divorce rate is actually slightly higher than the rest of the US, and Evangelicals have an even higher rate of divorce. So I would say that even common religious beliefs isn't keeping this ship afloat.

I think you have a noble ideal, TD, and long term emotional bonding and commitment is a good thing, and good for society, but looking at the realities, it looks like Paradise Lost, and to me it seems society is going in the opposite direction to what you're hoping for. But that's just my take.

[_truth dancer]

Hey Ray... thanks for the always insightful discussion!

Yes, my hope seems to be a long shot. Do you want to know why I am hopeful?

I'll assume you said yes! :-)

Because, the universe seems to continually bring forth more; more creations, more species, more emotions, more feelings, more insights, more knowledge, more awareness. There seems to be a continual deepening of compassion. What once started as a very selfish concern for oneself expanded to care for children, tribes, communities, city-states, nations and it is certianly moving toward a planetary concern. Sex, begun nearly four billion years ago as nothing more than a new way to bring forth creatures, has moved to a place where, in the human it has the potential to bring form amazing emotions, feelings, care and a bond unlike anything in the known universe.

I can't think of too many times when we permanently went backwards... (none actually). The primitive urges we inherited from our animal ancestors have changed. While we currently are in a state of chaos, what will come forth will be something new I feel certian

In other words, there seems to be something within the universe that continues to expand the reality of what is possible. And, it seems that intimacy is what brings forth the deepening of the human.

So... while it may not happen, I think it is a possibility. You are totally correct that there is a trend away from relationship, children, families. Absolutly there is no question about this. OTOH, there is also a sense of some humans wanting something more in relationship. People aren't content with mediocrity. Perhaps the search for something better will bring it forth?

I wonder if young people don't want relationships because relationships don't seem all that great! I don't blame them. I think they want something different. They have choices unlike any time in history. With those choices they are in effect saying, I would rather be single then have a bad relationship. Women would rather go it alone that be in a unhealthy marriage. Men also have no need to stay in a bad marriage. Other women are readily available. So, what will come forth?

What a mystery is the future.

:-)

~dancer~

[_Ray A]

Because, the universe seems to continually bring forth more; more creations, more species, more emotions, more feelings, more insights, more knowledge, more awareness. There seems to be a continual deepening of compassion. What once started as a very selfish concern for oneself expanded to care for children, tribes, communities, city-states, nations and it is certianly moving toward a planetary concern. Sex, begun nearly four billion years ago as nothing more than a new way to bring forth creatures, has moved to a place where, in the human it has the potential to bring form amazing emotions, feelings, care and a bond unlike anything in the known universe.

I agree with this, TD. Though I do think our tribal instincts are still very strong, and this is particularly manifest in religion, Muslims, Christians, Jews, Catholics. Perhaps this is what inspires writers like Dawkins and Sam Harris (whose book The End of Faith sold over 400,000 copies). I have always perceived religion as good at the basic levels, and one way to help people to inculcate good values. Now I'm really not sure about this. Dawkins makes some excellent points in his book, and it is "middle of the road" people like me he's trying to stir. I don't know, I may have a different view after I finish his book. But I see more and more division because of religion, where the tribal instincts really come out. I see no "deepening compassion" from religion at all, just exclusiveness. Of course there are individual exceptions, probably all "liberals".

I can't think of too many times when we permanently went backwards... (none actually). The primitive urges we inherited from our animal ancestors have changed. While we currently are in a state of chaos, what will come forth will be something new I feel certian

Yes I have seen this in my own lifetime, particularly in regard to racism.

In other words, there seems to be something within the universe that continues to expand the reality of what is possible. And, it seems that intimacy is what brings forth the deepening of the human.

And communication. I think people want to communicate thoughts more, we are getting more opinionated, it seems to try to resolve differences, even if we argue more than agree. The internet has facilitated this. We might reach universal agreement sometime in the 25th century.

So... while it may not happen, I think it is a possibility. You are totally correct that there is a trend away from relationship, children, families. Absolutly there is no question about this. OTOH, there is also a sense of some humans wanting something more in relationship. People aren't content with mediocrity. Perhaps the search for something better will bring it forth?

Civilisations go in cycles, so the current trend may not last at all. From my own perspective I don't want a relationship, so I'm one of the flies in the ointment at the moment. I think I need to go on a Recovery From Marriage board.

I wonder if young people don't want relationships because relationships don't seem all that great! I don't blame them. I think they want something different. They have choices unlike any time in history. With those choices they are in effect saying, I would rather be single then have a bad relationship. Women would rather go it alone that be in a unhealthy marriage. Men also have no need to stay in a bad marriage. Other women are readily available. So, what will come forth?

I think they do want relationships, but long term commitment scares the hell out of them. The idea of being with one person for 30-50 years seems like a prison sentence. My parents were married for 56 years, and that was not uncommon for people born in the early 20th century. Today people married for 20 years get comments as if they've won the Olympic marathon.

[_truth dancer]

Hi Ray...

Civilisations go in cycles, so the current trend may not last at all. From my own perspective I don't want a relationship, so I'm one of the flies in the ointment at the moment. I think I need to go on a Recovery From Marriage board.

Well, OK, here is the thing. I wouldn't want one either if it was anything less than stellar, amazing, fantastic, rewarding, fulfilling, exciting, completely, totally fabulous!

I am not one who would go for a marriage where people just survive or endure to the end. AAHHH!!!

I think the reality of how many relationships are, is sending a clear message to young people that it is so NOT what they want in life. I don't blame them at all. And those who have been burned a few times are pretty much done with it all as well!

One thing... I think those who do not want a relationship (and all that that entails) should not be married. It sounds trite but in my opinion, men who cannot be satisfied with one lifetime partner should not pretend that they will be. Ya know? If a guy knows it is not for him, he should be upfront about it. (Like you)! :-)

I know quite a few women who have no desire whatsoever to be married. It doesn't even remotely appeal to them. I totally understand their position, as I do men who do not want to be with one woman. The important thing is to be upfront about it all!

Hopefully there will be less pressure to be married in the future. :-)

~dancer~

[_Rollo Tomasi]

I have come away with an entirely different perception. I don't recall him ever saying a positive thing about the Church, and if he had, it pales in comparison to his frequent gripes and complaints.

I recall going to bat on many occasions for the Brethren's traditional preaching of the location of Cumorah in NY and hemispheric model for the Book of Mormon, and pointing out the many fallacies of the LGT. I also remember going at it for pages supporting the 12 witnesses to the gold plates. I recently stated my belief that the Brethren are honest in their beliefs of the Church, and not running some scam. Perhaps I don't go around gushing about the Brethren or LDS-related issues, but simply try to express my own opinion, pro or con.

... and when you consider the audience to whom he addressed his quip (i.e. relatively and predominately hostile to the Church), Rollo's alleged genuine love doesn't quite come shining through to me. I know that were I one of his loved one's, I certainly wouldn't appreciate him gossiping and complaining behind my back like he has with the Church over the last year or so.

The only "genuine love" I have is for my family. The Church is an organization -- it is not a form of golden calf that I worship. If mistakes are made, or policies instituted that I think are wrong, then I will speak up.

[_Fiannan]

I wonder if young people don't want relationships because relationships don't seem all that great! I don't blame them. I think they want something different. They have choices unlike any time in history. With those choices they are in effect saying, I would rather be single then have a bad relationship.

This generation has choices? Really? Not in reference to economics. People still want marriage, the class that marriage has dropped is the lower middle/working class. They want security like their parents had before they commit, but sadly that security will not be there for them. If they cannot adapt then they will cease to matter in a biological context.