Page 1 of 8
Chastity, Young Marrieds, and Pregnancy
Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2008 1:03 am
by _beastie
From BYU Magazine Winter 2008
True to the Faith – by Gordon B. Hinckley
We Believe in Being Chaste
I observed a very interesting thing the other day. In Salt Lake City, early on a Saturday morning, the Key Bank Building was brought down with a series of well-placed detonations. It all happened in three or four seconds, with a great cloud of dust that rolled to the northwest. The process is called an implosion, in contrast with an explosion.
The building was constructed nearly 30 years ago. I suppose construction extended over a period of at least a year, maybe two. Now it was gong in seconds.
That, my friends, is the story of so many lives. We nurture them ever so carefully over a period of years. Then we find ourselves in highly charged circumstances. Mistakes are made. Chastity is compromised. There is an implosion, and a ball of dust is all that is left.
I was reminded of this when I recalled a young man and a young woman who came to my office. He was a handsome boy and she was a beautiful girl. They were university students. Their future looked bright and beautiful. But they gave in to temptation. Now they were going to have a baby. Their dreams of the future literally collapsed. They would be married. He would work at a low-paying job with the meager skills that he had.
Tears filled their eyes as they talked with me. But there was no escape from the reality that faced them. Their lives had suffered an implosion, and a tower of dreams had come tumbling down.
So why is it that having to get married and have a baby at a very young age will doom their futures, and result in a low-paying job, when if the same couple had reversed the order, and done nothing different except by marrying first and then getting pregnant, they would be celebrated by this same prophet? Still in school. Still young. Still struggling to support a family they’re ill equipped to support. Why in the world does the church push this scenario on its young people when it clearly recognizes how damaging the circumstances can be if the pregnancy preceded marriage?
Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2008 1:12 am
by _skippy the dead
Your point is very interesting. It has even been recently pronounced from the pulpit (can't remember who said it) that young people should not put off marriage for education, nor should they put off starting a family for education. So yes, had they married and got pregnant immediately, they would be praised for their obedience to God, rather than pitied for having to live on a meager wage from a low-skills job.
by the way - this would describe my sibling perfectly. Happily, the husband managed to complete his education (including a master's degree), while still continuing to add to their family, and he is now a rising star at a Fortune 500 company. So much for their implosion.
You'd think GBH would at least be happy that the kids decided to stay together and raise the child rather than some other alternatives that the church finds so distasteful.
Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2008 1:24 am
by _charity
I think you don't understand the age group that is being addressed about postponing marriage. I have been involved with YW's leadership positions for years. Girls in YW are constantly told to educate themselves. I know boys are counseled to prepare themselves for occupations where they can support their families. The whole don't date until you are 16 is to keep young people from getting into serious relationships too early.
There are two groups who are being addressed with the "don't postpone" advice. One is those couples who are already romantically involved. Once young peole start to get serious about each other, it is far better to marry than to string out a romantic relationship until they become unchate, whether or not they become pregnant. Our children were always encouraged to have long courships and very short engagements. The second group is comprised of those who are seriously postponing marriage/babies until long range career goals are met. This advice is meant for those couples who think that they must have the 4,500 sq. foot home, the 2 SUV's and a big bank account before they can "afford" children.
Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2008 1:27 am
by _truth dancer
Ha... funny. Sort of.
Yeah, the same couple if they had been married the previous week would be following the prophet and doing what many LDS young people do.
Hmm...
~dancer~
Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2008 1:30 am
by _beastie
There are two groups who are being addressed with the "don't postpone" advice. One is those couples who are already romantically involved. Once young peole start to get serious about each other, it is far better to marry than to string out a romantic relationship until they become unchate, whether or not they become pregnant. Our children were always encouraged to have long courships and very short engagements. The second group is comprised of those who are seriously postponing marriage/babies until long range career goals are met. This advice is meant for those couples who think that they must have the 4,500 sq. foot home, the 2 SUV's and a big bank account before they can "afford" children.
From the recent comments of Pirate and others, it doesn't sound like the pressure has changed much since I was a BYU student. Believe me, the pressure was ON all BYU students - well, RM males and all females - to quit procrastinating and FIND A MATE. It wasn't pressured aimed solely at those who are already involved AT ALL.
And, by the way, this doesn't address the real point of my thread, which is that getting married young and having a baby right away spells doom in one scenario, and yet is pushed as long as the wedding ring comes first.
Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2008 1:36 am
by _charity
beastie wrote:There are two groups who are being addressed with the "don't postpone" advice. One is those couples who are already romantically involved. Once young peole start to get serious about each other, it is far better to marry than to string out a romantic relationship until they become unchate, whether or not they become pregnant. Our children were always encouraged to have long courships and very short engagements. The second group is comprised of those who are seriously postponing marriage/babies until long range career goals are met. This advice is meant for those couples who think that they must have the 4,500 sq. foot home, the 2 SUV's and a big bank account before they can "afford" children.
From the recent comments of Pirate and others, it doesn't sound like the pressure has changed much since I was a BYU student. Believe me, the pressure was ON all BYU students - well, RM males and all females - to quit procrastinating and FIND A MATE. It wasn't pressured aimed solely at those who are already involved AT ALL.
And, by the way, this doesn't address the real point of my thread, which is that getting married young and having a baby right away spells doom in one scenario, and yet is pushed as long as the wedding ring comes first.
We hold our breaths when young couples, without much or most of their occupational education completed , get married. We hope they will be fine, but we are realistic. We hope that since they have decided freely to marry (not ahead of an unintentional birth) that they have considered how to meet all the demands that will be placed on them, mainly for the young man to become prepared occupationally to support a family.
With the couple having a baby they didn't intend, we can know right away they have had very little success in preparing for the future. Their future is much more chancy.
Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2008 1:40 am
by _beastie
We hold our breaths when young couples, without much or most of their occupational education completed , get married. We hope they will be fine, but we are realistic. We hope that since they have decided freely to marry (not ahead of an unintentional birth) that they have considered how to meet all the demands that will be placed on them, mainly for the young man to become prepared occupationally to support a family.
With the couple having a baby they didn't intend, we can know right away they have had very little success in preparing for the future. Their future is much more chancy.
Who is the "we"?? It certainly sounds to me like the leaders of the church still encourage young marrieds not to delay child bearing.
Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2008 1:43 am
by _karl61
I remember listening to those thoughts in General Conference; I got so pissed off when he said that now the guy had to take a low paying job. what a crock of s***. I guy a year older than I in our ward went to Ricks College. He met a real nice girl from Wyoming. Well they found that they were going to be parents. He wanted to be a dentist. He joined the army and did all the dental things he could there. He then went back to school and got his degree. He then applied and was accepted to dental school. That was the last I heard of him.
This type of speech is dangerous at times. There is a Presidential candidate who lost a close family member from an illegal abortion. She had this image pounded in her mind of a temple marriage. If you are willing to have an abortion so you can get married in the temple then something is very wrong. People here talk about pressure from within the church to live a certain way. The pressure can so bad it can destroy someone or in some cases prevent people from taking a break and reviewing other options.
Gordon B. should have been tazered when he said the words low paying job.
Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2008 2:21 am
by _charity
thestyleguy wrote:I remember listening to those thoughts in General Conference; I got so pissed off when he said that now the guy had to take a low paying job. what a crock of shi?. I guy a year older than I in our ward went to Ricks College. He met a real nice girl from Wyoming. Well they found that they were going to be parents. He wanted to be a dentist. He joined the army and did all the dental things he could there. He then went back to school and got his degree. He then applied and was accepted to dental school. That was the last I heard of him.
This type of speech is dangerous at times. There is a Presidential candidate who lost a close family member from an illegal abortion. She had this image pounded in her mind of a temple marriage. If you are willing to have an abortion so you can get married in the temple then something is very wrong. People here talk about pressure from within the church to live a certain way. The pressure can so bad it can destroy someone or in some cases prevent people from taking a break and reviewing other options.
Gordon B. should have been tazered when he said the words low paying job.
So you generalize from one guy you know that still got to be a dentist after maryring before completing his degree to every can do that. And Church leaders generalize from those who quite scohol to take jobs to support families and are stuck. I think if you were to do a real study, you would find the ones going on to degrees later to be a much smaller number than those who fare much less well.
Posted: Wed Jan 23, 2008 2:26 am
by _beastie
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.