Mormons and Suicide

[_Trevor]

Poor Trevor. You got caught with your pants down and now you are throwing mud because you are embarrassed. You asked for a source. I provided one, which you obviously thought I wouldn't be able to do, which refuted your "teenage marriage" comment which was no doubt shot from the hip.

Now I know how it is you stay in the Church, charity. You stubbornly refuse to accept reality. If you think I am embarrassed about anything here, you are sorely mistaken. I am amused by the cuteness of you pretending otherwise, and that is about it. It is kind of sad is that you are not embarrassed by your poor, incoherent, and illogical writing. Statistics and citations will only save you when you have an argument. Sadly, you haven't bothered to sustain one.

By the way, charity, since you are such a sharp one, tell me where it is I called for sources in this thread as you contend? Are you sure it is I who have been caught with my pants down, I who am throwing mud out of embarrassment? If I never did call for a source, why is it that I would be caught with my pants down? How is it that I thought you wouldn't be able to find a source when I never asked for one? How on earth did this source refute my statement that teenage marriages take place in the LDS Church, except in your feeble mind? Obviously, teenage marriages do take place in the LDS Church. Please don't deny that they do, because I am growing weary of watching you make a fool of yourself.

[_charity]

By the way, charity. Since you are such a sharp one, tell me where it is I called for sources in this thread as you contend? Are you sure it is I who have been caught with my pants down, I who am throwing mud out of embarrassment? If I never did call for a source, why is it that I would be caught with my pants down? How is it that I thought you wouldn't be able to find a source when I never asked for one? How on earth did this source refute my statement that teenage marriages take place in the LDS Church, expect in your feeble mind? Obviously, teenage marriages do take place in the LDS Church. Please don't deny that they do, because I am growing weary of watching you make a fool of yourself.

Mister Scratch originally posted

The last time I was at Temple Square, there was indeed something akin to a "queue" outside the temple---I.e., a "line," as it were, of 18- and 19-year-old kids waiting to be married.

I replied "And about the ages of the couples. The 18 or 19 year old is definiately a rarity. Most couples are out of their teens. Eatly to mid-twenties at least."

To which:

CFR, Charity. This is totally bogus. The vast majority of the couples I saw when I was last at Temple Square were 18-19 years old, or perhaps 21-22 for the males (I.e., the RMs), tops. We have all read and heard the exhortations from the Brethren encouraging young LDS to get married ASAP, preferably as soon as the young men get back from their missions, so it should come as no surprise that teenaged kids constitute a significant number of temple marriages. I would be interested in seeing some figures, though know the Church, this stuff is probably top secret.

So the original CFR came from Mister. Scratch. But then notice what you chime in with:

[quote= "Trevor"] With an average like that, I would expect that quite a few of these kids are getting married at seventeen in the chapel by their bishops. Now there's something to brag about. [/quote]

Charity, you do not arrive at an average with the lowest age of marriage being the calculated average! Get real.

Here we see you weaseling around the stats that Mister Scratch asked for. And I can see you did not ask for them. Although you posted without attributing to Scratch the call for them.

You did not initially ask for stats. Mr. Scratch did. But then you jumped on the stats bandwagon, with claims of 17 year olds married by bishops. You were in the dog fight there. And then you got defensive about it. You can't deny that.

[_charity]

Now I know how it is you stay in the Church, charity. You stubbornly refuse to accept reality. If you think I am embarrassed about anything here, you are sorely mistaken. I am amused by the cuteness of you pretending otherwise, and that is about it. It is kind of sad is that you are not embarrassed by your poor, incoherent, and illogical writing. Statistics and citations will only save you when you have an argument. Sadly, you haven't bothered to sustain one.

By the way, charity, since you are such a sharp one, tell me where it is I called for sources in this thread as you contend? Are you sure it is I who have been caught with my pants down, I who am throwing mud out of embarrassment? If I never did call for a source, why is it that I would be caught with my pants down? How is it that I thought you wouldn't be able to find a source when I never asked for one? How on earth did this source refute my statement that teenage marriages take place in the LDS Church, except in your feeble mind? Obviously, teenage marriages do take place in the LDS Church. Please don't deny that they do, because I am growing weary of watching you make a fool of yourself.

Oh, for Pete's sake. Does an occasional LDS teenager get married? Of course. One of my daughters was 18. But one was 23. One was 21, and another was 24. So let's see. That would average out to 21.5. And none were married by a bishop.

But from the stats I provided, you can see that it is a deception to suggest that all LDS marry really young, as teenagers, by bishops. That is the decpetion you are trying to leave.

[_Trevor]

Here we see you weaseling around the stats that Mister Scratch asked for. And I can see you did not ask for them. Although you posted without attributing to Scratch the call for them.

You did not initially ask for stats. Mr. Scratch did. But then you jumped on the stats bandwagon, with claims of 17 year olds married by bishops. You were in the dog fight there. And then you got defensive about it. You can't deny that.

Ah, so you acknowledge that I did not ask for sources. In fact, I did not chime in until after the stats were provided, which means I would not have had a dog in the fight, nor felt that I had been caught with my pants down. In fact, your representation of the history of this thread, and my reaction to it, is so far off that you are either being sloppy or deceptive. I'll go for sloppy.

I am defensive about nothing. I don't really care when it is that LDS children are getting married. I would say that a fair number of them, probably more than the national average, do get married when they are 17 or 18. If the average for young women hovers around 21 or 22, then that is hardly "mid-twenties" and it definitely is the case that it is normal for young LDS women to marry at 18 or 19.

My only purpose in entering this thread was to point out where what you are saying does not make sense. I am not overly concerned about young kids getting married, so long as they enter into the relationship responsibly and for the long haul. I do think it is better that people wait until they are sufficiently mature.

[_Trevor]

Oh, for Pete's sake. Does an occasional LDS teenager get married? Of course. One of my daughters was 18. But one was 23. One was 21, and another was 24. So let's see. That would average out to 21.5. And none were married by a bishop.

But from the stats I provided, you can see that it is a deception to suggest that all LDS marry really young, as teenagers, by bishops. That is the decpetion you are trying to leave.

Of course, charity, what happens in your ward or your family represents the norm for the church. Ugh.

Heads up, Mrs. Strawman, I never said that all LDS marry real young. If there is a deception that someone is trying to leave, it is your deception that I have said things I did not say. I should not be surprised about that.

[_charity]

Of course, charity, what happens in your ward or your family represents the norm for the church. Ugh.

Heads up, Mrs. Strawman, I never said that all LDS marry real young. If there is a deception that someone is trying to leave, it is your deception that I have said things I did not say. I should not be surprised about that.

Your opinions have been based on your experience. No stats. So, yes, I think my experience probably does Trump yours because there has been more of it. And because I did provide scientific data to back up what I said.

[_Trevor]

Your opinions have been based on your experience. No stats. So, yes, I think my experience probably does Trump yours because there has been more of it. And because I did provide scientific data to back up what I said.

My statements were based on a basic understanding of how statistics work. You provided the data. I tried to help you understand that with an average that low, teenagers obviously were getting married, and a fair sight more than one here or there. Sometimes you can be really thickheaded.

[_charity]

With an average like that, I would expect that quite a few of these kids are getting married at seventeen in the chapel by their bishops. Now there's something to brag about.

I don't really care when it is that LDS children are getting married. I would say that a fair number of them, probably more than the national average, do get married when they are 17 or 18. If the average for young women hovers around 21 or 22, then that is hardly "mid-twenties" and it definitely is the case that it is normal for young LDS women to marry at 18 or 19.

I like the way you change your story. I think you probably know that a 17 year old is quite different than an 18 year old in this culture. 17 means while in high school, or dropped out. 18 means graduated from high school. 19 for women means graduated from high school, living away from home, going to school, working. And the national averge of 22 is hardly a child.

And when you went off Mr. Scratch's post, he wasn't saying it was the brides who were younger, he was including males in that number. And there certainly is a large difference between a 17 year old male, and a 24 year old.

And of course, you forgot to mention that 21 year old males in LDS culture are a lot different than 21 year old males in the culture at large. A returned misisonary has been out "in the world." Many of them in foreign countries. Away from home in a sense that most other males don't experience. Only letters from family in 2 years. No running home to mom when the McD job ran out. The missionary has to learn how to survive with a roomate that he can't just chug down the hall to get away from. And 2 years of serving other people, putting away his own selfish interests. That is pretty maturing. And of course, the average age of marriage is 3 years after getting back.

Hardly the 17 year olds in the chapel marriage you suggested.

[_the road to hana]

And of course, you forgot to mention that 21 year old males in LDS culture are a lot different than 21 year old males in the culture at large. A returned misisonary has been out "in the world." Many of them in foreign countries. Away from home in a sense that most other males don't experience.

I'm sure there are plenty of young men who are currently serving their country in the military, or have done so in the past, who would take serious issue with your statement.

[_charity]

And of course, you forgot to mention that 21 year old males in LDS culture are a lot different than 21 year old males in the culture at large. A returned misisonary has been out "in the world." Many of them in foreign countries. Away from home in a sense that most other males don't experience.

I'm sure there are plenty of young men who are currently serving their country in the military, or have done so in the past, who would take serious issue with your statement.

Of course, there are young men in the miilitary, and their experience isn't the common experience in our culture either. Less than one third of males have experience in the military. That means 67% or so don't. Like I said.