Spouse Swapping

[dellme]

4 minutes ago, lostinwater said:

Thanks @dellme

i'm just speaking to the experiences regarding which i am familiar.  That's quite a lot of experiences from where i sit - but i definitely won't claim my perceptions are necessarily representative of the whole.

Though regardless of whose match-stick of experiences represents the tree more fully, concepts of statistical relevance are profoundly irrelevant for those to whom this has occurred.  

I don't doubt that it has happened or that it has happened to you-it is horrible that it has happened to you. 

I just don't believe it is frequent and that when it does happen the Bishop basically loses credibility and authority-excepting of course those cases where it is necessary to tell someone else (for example if you want people to visit you in the hospital, or help with a home project, you will probably need that information to be let out).

And yes statistical anomalies doesn't help when you are the one it happens to . . .it sucks.

Edited May 22, 2018 by dellme

[person0]

3 hours ago, Vort said:

3 hours ago, BJ64 said:

3 hours ago, Vort said:

True enough. But the point is that when we say, "it is not so great a sin that the Lord would reject you", we betray our misunderstanding of the nature of sin (and of God).

That was a quote from Elder Packer

If this is the case, then I was speaking out of turn.

Initially, when I read your statement, I interpreted you to be speaking in a different context than that from which Elder Packer was speaking.  In my mind, both statements are correct in a separate context.

Sin as small as a simple lie is sufficient to separate us from God for all eternity; such separation would be exactly what we deserve since no unclean thing can be in God's presence.  In this context, we should always be pensive and conscious of our shortcomings, our sins, and how they affect our relationship to God, which should lead us to a broken heart and contrite spirit.  This as Alma suggested, should lead us to have our 'hearts be drawn out in prayer unto him continually'.  We are beggars; we should always remember this; it isn't going to change, and we should keep begging, and never allow ourselves to feel entitled to salvation.

That said, in another context, Christ's atonement, which fulfilled the requirements of justice, changes the rules of the 'game'; it makes it so that He is able to look at our sins as He sees fit, since He is the one who overcame them on our behalf.  Upon this principle, those without law, and also children, are not held accountable for their mistakes and/or sins.  Without the atonement, they would still be relegated to Hell with the rest of us, regardless of their lack of knowledge or understanding.  Likewise, Elder Packer, undoubtedly in accordance with this concept in general, recognizes that the Lord, because of His power over our salvation, will always be as merciful as He possibly can be, even in situations such as these.  That is not to excuse any sinful behavior, but simply to recognize and acknowledge the Lord's power and authority over our salvation, and His loving grace.

Edited May 22, 2018 by person0

[Mike]

Sometimes my wife pretends she wants to "swap" me (out), but we both know that we've arrived at the point where we're better off with each other. (I can't get Orleans' song "Still the One" out of my head at the moment). 🤣

[JohnsonJones]

4 hours ago, dellme said:

Then you are quite frankly a very naive individual as much as I'd love to go back to the 50s social code and morality-that ain't happening. Average age kids today are exposed to pornography  is at most 11.  You do a child no good by not telling them about the world-you leave them defenseless.

I was told about petting and necking easily in YM/YW when I was no more than 14 (probably younger). Looking back, I only wish they had actually explained what necking was (for some reason my recollection is that is was never really defined-petting was however).

This is really, really simple, you can't obey the LoC if you don't know what the LoC actually is.  So part of being in a leadership role is to actually explain and teach what the LoC encompasses-that is NECESSARY.

I understand the fear that if you teach someone that smoking is bad, they might just try out smoking, but if you don't teach them smoking is bad and then they do smoke the fault lies with the leader for not teaching that it was bad.

No one is suggesting that a Bishop explains HOW to M or HOW to have sex, only that that Bishop teach that self-stimulation is against the LoC just like pre-marital sex is against the LoC.  The logical conclusion of your argument is that if it's so horrible to simply teach a child from a Bishop that self-stimulation is a sin, then they should never teach that premarital sex is a sin either.

Why would you insist on Bishops purposefully breaking church policy???  A one on one situation between an adult stranger (non-relative) and a child is NOT the place for this to be learned.  If the child opens up on this themselves, the Bishop can clarify as guided by the spirit, but in the current world today, a Bishop doing what you propose is walking a VERY fine line when going out on their own and teaching this with no justification in church interviews.  There is a REASON we are to stick to the questions in the Temple interview and that these questions are the basic outline of what we are to ask.   If a youth opens up on their own and confesses to sins, the Bishop is to make judgements (or turn to higher authority if needed), which is what is supposed to occur in those situations.  However, the Bishop is not to go out and ask additional questions like you suggest on their own accord or start teaching things beyond what they are advised to do in Church policy.

Law of chastity items can be taught in church lessons where you have others to see what is going on with witnesses that nothing else is happening.  The church has instituted a two adult rule recently for the protection of the Children and teens as WELL as the adults.  This is from hard experience of what can happen otherwise.  The other place they can learn these things is where it is proper, from their parents.

You can call me naïve, but when you start asking 12 year old kids that type of stuff in one on one interviews with just you and the child there and trying to teach them this type of thing with no other witnesses to defend you on your intent, don't be surprised when you get hit by a lawsuit and most likely lose, or worse, get charged with criminal charges. 

In such an instance, I would add, if you have done as you suggest and broken the church policies, the church probably would not have your back as you did not follow their instructions on what you should be doing in the first place.  There are REASONS the church advises certain questions and how to go about interviews and other items in certain ways.  When you decide to go Rogue and do your own thing in an interview, the problems arising from such fall upon you and, though sometimes the church is drawn in, in many instances it can point out that the particular church leader was disobeying their policies in the first place and hence liability should be placed completely on the individual who decided to go Rogue in the interview process.

Edited May 22, 2018 by JohnsonJones

[zil]

2 minutes ago, Mike said:

Sometimes my wife pretends she wants to "swap" me (out), but we both know that we've arrived at the point where we're better off with each other. (I can't get Orleans' song "Still the One" out of my head at the moment). 🤣

And have you figured out yet whether she likes piña coladas and getting caught in the rain?

[Mike]

18 minutes ago, zil said:

And have you figured out yet whether she likes piña coladas and getting caught in the rain?

Hahaha, she loves piña coladas, but won't walk with me in the rain. What can I say? One learns to sacrifice (which someone told me means giving up something I want for something I want more. ...we both like the feel of the ocean.) 😊

Edited May 22, 2018 by Mike

[BJ64]

 I would not want to be a bishop alone with anyone in an office. All it would take is for a person to accuse you of something inappropriate and it’s your word against theirs. This is one reason missionaries go two by two not alone. 

[Mike]

1 minute ago, BJ64 said:

 ...This is one reason missionaries go two by two not alone. 

Which I confess used to drive me crazy. 😂

[Guest]

On 5/21/2018 at 6:03 PM, BJ64 said:

No I think of her as my eternal companion but I do think of her as the object of my love and affection. 

The boy can be taught!

[JayKi]

On 5/21/2018 at 3:11 AM, BJ64 said:

On a similar note I have heard of BYU students going to Las Vegas for the weekend, getting married, having sex then having the marriage annulled. 

This practice is condemned but to me it seems totally legal and therefore not fornication. 

Really? That is worse than just fornication to me. 

[dellme]

43 minutes ago, BJ64 said:

 I would not want to be a bishop alone with anyone in an office. All it would take is for a person to accuse you of something inappropriate and it’s your word against theirs. This is one reason missionaries go two by two not alone. 

And that is exactly what the #MeToo movement is doing, taking a small problem that had both male AND female complacency (come on there are women who sleep their way to the middle, who know get power out of ratting out powerful men).  No way in hades, I'd be alone with a woman in the workplace anymore.

So many times in life the perception of a problem is much, much bigger than the actual problem itself.  The perception of abuse by Bishops and leadership is way overblown and much bigger than the actual problem itself.

[Overwatch]

No. The couples are not cheating. I mean, can you cheat on someone who is dead?

Also, if a woman wants to be sealed to a new man then (from my studies) she has to get her previous sealing cancelled. That sounds really sad though for her dead husband. :C