Mormon and gay. Where are we going?

[Vort]

25 minutes ago, BJ64 said:

You don’t understand the effect of testosterone so there no point in discussing it with you. 

BJ, the fact that some young men can manage to keep their pants on in the presence of attractive young women does not mean they're testosterone-deficient. It might just mean they have developed some self-control.

[BJ64]

11 minutes ago, Anddenex said:

OK, you don't understand the doctrine of moral agency and control so agreed there is no point in discussing it with you. 🙄

My point is that you don’t understand the amount of influence testosterone has on a man and that being the case you apparently have never felt the influence of testosterone. 

You seem to be an example of the old men I wrote about with low testosterone who pat themselves on the back because they are never tempted by anything of a sexual nature. 

As I said before all men are expected to live the same standard of sexual purity but when there little testosterone circulating in your blood there’s little sexual desire to keep under control. 

[estradling75]

13 minutes ago, Vort said:

BJ, the fact that some young men can manage to keep their pants on in the presence of attractive young women does not mean they're testosterone-deficient. It might just mean they have developed some self-control.

Indeed...  There is a LARGE difference between "Control" and "Influence"  Testosterone can have a huge and potent "Influence" however it does not "Control" us.  We can surrender control to our baseline urges (which is what testosterone is) but that is it Influence persuading us to do so.  The control remains with us, no matter how much we might want to convince ourselves we are not responsible for it.

[BJ64]

26 minutes ago, Vort said:

BJ, the fact that some young men can manage to keep their pants on in the presence of attractive young women does not mean they're testosterone-deficient. It might just mean they have developed some self-control.

As I wrote before all men are expected to maintain the same standard of sexual purity. However the man with the higher testosterone level is going to have to work at it harder than the man with the low level. A man with low testosterone and little sexual desire is not going to be tempted to the same degree as a high testosterone man. That’s just how it works and is the primary reason why an old couple may only desire sex once a month while a young couple may want it once a day. The “self control” that older men think they have developed over time may merely be the loss of testosterone and it’s effects. It is also why it’s unlikely that a ninety year old man will be tempted to engage in pornography and masturbation while a young might. 

Again that’s simply how hormones work. If you don’t understand that then you’ve never felt the effects of fluctuations in testosterone. 

The loss of testosterone is gradual and not noticed by many men but bring an older man’s testosterone level up to that of a teenager and he’ll testify of the difference it made in his sex life. 

[BJ64]

21 minutes ago, estradling75 said:

Indeed...  There is a LARGE difference between "Control" and "Influence"  Testosterone can have a huge and potent "Influence" however it does not "Control" us.  We can surrender control to our baseline urges (which is what testosterone is) but that is it Influence persuading us to do so.  The control remains with us, no matter how much we might want to convince ourselves we are not responsible for it.

I never said we are not responsible for it. What I have repeatedly said is that it’s much easy  to control a low sex drive than a high sex drive with the difference of the two being testosterone. 

[Anddenex]

32 minutes ago, BJ64 said:

My point is that you don’t understand the amount of influence testosterone has on a man and that being the case you apparently have never felt the influence of testosterone. 

You seem to be an example of the old men I wrote about with low testosterone who pat themselves on the back because they are never tempted by anything of a sexual nature. 

As I said before all men are expected to live the same standard of sexual purity but when there little testosterone circulating in your blood there’s little sexual desire to keep under control. 

If you used the word "influence" in the beginning we wouldn't be having this conversation. Influence is different than control, which is the word you used, not me.  Now you are using "influence" us rather than control us. Which is what I said previously in my example with the river. The river "acts upon" and how something influences us is a measure of acting upon us.

My wife and my teenage self would tend to disagree with you, but surely you know me better than I know myself because you have studied testosterone levels. A male who chooses to remain chaste as a teenager, as a young adult, and as older adult doesn't mean they have "never" been tempted by anything of a sexual nature. 

[BJ64]

1 hour ago, Anddenex said:

If you used the word "influence" in the beginning we wouldn't be having this conversation. Influence is different than control, which is the word you used, not me.  Now you are using "influence" us rather than control us. Which is what I said previously in my example with the river. The river "acts upon" and how something influences us is a measure of acting upon us.

My wife and my teenage self would tend to disagree with you, but surely you know me better than I know myself because you have studied testosterone levels. A male who chooses to remain chaste as a teenager, as a young adult, and as older adult doesn't mean they have "never" been tempted by anything of a sexual nature. 

I’m not saying they haven’t been tempted. I’m saying that men with low testosterone, speaking mostly of 50+ men here do not have the difficulty resisting sexual temptation that younger men have and although they think it’s because they have developed a great amount of self control it’s mostly because they have lost the desire. 

However, in a broader sense hormones do control your body. Your body is regulated by them and there’s nothing you can do about it short of hormonal intervention. 

Hormones turn a boy into a man and a girl into a woman. They regulate a women’s cycle and they give a man a constant sex drive so he will mate with the woman. 

Hormones regulate metabolism and blood sugar. They give you the fight or flight response. They control hunger and satiety.  Yes hormones do control you in a very real sense. 

[Vort]

1 hour ago, BJ64 said:

Again that’s simply how hormones work. If you don’t understand that then you’ve never felt the effects of fluctuations in testosterone.

To restate BJ's fundamental argument:

"High testosterone level is why some men don't control themselves very well. The more testosterone they have, the manlier they are. The manlier they are, the higher their libido, and the harder it is to be chaste. Chaste men aren't really virtuous; they just don't have much testosterone. They're pathetic little girly men. Mighty men of testosterone have mighty struggles with our libido. We are the more to be admired -- and desired by the womenfolk -- because we have attempted to tame our inherent manliness.

"And anyone who disagrees is one of those girly men who don't have much testosterone. If only they had as much testosterone as we do, they'd understand that their chastity is nothing to be proud of, just a side effect of not having enough manly testosterone running through their veins. Unchaste men prove by their raging libido that they're the real men around here. That's why the chicks dig us."

Okay. You go ahead and think that, BJ, if it makes you feel better.

[Vort]

13 minutes ago, BJ64 said:

I’m not saying they haven’t been tempted. I’m saying that men with low testosterone, speaking mostly of 50+ men here do not have the difficulty resisting sexual temptation that younger men have and although they think it’s because they have developed a great amount of self control it’s mostly because they have lost the desire. 

Funny, then, how those same 50+-year-old men were keeping their pants zipped up 30 years ago. Ah, they probably just had low testosterone back then, too. Wimps.

[askandanswer]

8 hours ago, MormonGator said:

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha. 

You misunderstood-I said college friend. I graduated in 2007. You graduated in 1947.

Clear evidence of the decline in standards from 1947 to 2007

[estradling75]

10 hours ago, Anddenex said:

If you used the word "influence" in the beginning we wouldn't be having this conversation. Influence is different than control, which is the word you used, not me.  Now you are using "influence" us rather than control us. Which is what I said previously in my example with the river. The river "acts upon" and how something influences us is a measure of acting upon us.

My wife and my teenage self would tend to disagree with you, but surely you know me better than I know myself because you have studied testosterone levels. A male who chooses to remain chaste as a teenager, as a young adult, and as older adult doesn't mean they have "never" been tempted by anything of a sexual nature. 

Exactly this...  Words have meaning... You choose the word 'control' not 'influence.'  And while it does control some biological process it does not control a Person's choices.  It can influence a person's choices no one is denying that.  And some people might struggle with controlling the influence for a variety of factors, including age and hormone levels.

But the moment you choose to use the word 'control' you invalidated any use of agency on that person's behalf.

 

[Anddenex]

34 minutes ago, estradling75 said:

Exactly this...  Words have meaning... You choose the word 'control' not 'influence.'  And while it does control some biological process it does not control a Person's choices.  It can influence a person's choices no one is denying that.  And some people might struggle with controlling the influence for a variety of factors, including age and hormone levels.

But the moment you choose to use the word 'control' you invalidated any use of agency on that person's behalf.

 

Not sure if this was meant for BJ64, or for me. I have been using the words "act upon" which would be similar to "influence."  I agree fully with your comment which is why my original response to BJ64's statement of "Many people think they are in control of themselves when it’s actually hormones that are controlling them," was, " Well, I guess all us males we should just toss out moral agency then if we are being controlled by our testosterone levels."

I agree, the moment we choose the word "control" we are invalidating our ability to use our moral agency God has given us. We can be influenced, enticed, or acted upon by many things, like hormone levels, but in the end we ultimately choose self-mastery (self-control), or to give into our influences.

 

 

[estradling75]

1 minute ago, Anddenex said:

Not sure if this was meant for BJ64, or for me.

Sorry for the confusion... I was Amulek-ing to your Alma-ing

[Anddenex]

7 minutes ago, estradling75 said:

Sorry for the confusion... I was Amulek-ing to your Alma-ing

OK, this is what I thought, but had to make sure

[BJ64]

Here is what I said “Many people think they are in control of themselves when it’s actually hormones that are controlling them.“

While how you act is under your control, unless you use hormonal intervention you do not control your sex drive. Your hormones control your sex drive whether that be high or low. Your hormones don’t influence your sex drive they control it. Hormones don’t influence a woman’s cycle they control it. A woman can’t just use her willpower to override her monthly cycle. Hormones don’t make a man commit sexual sin but they control is desire or drive to commit such acts. Hence my statement that a man with low testosterone does not have the same challenge that a man with high testosterone has in avoiding sexual sin and that an old man who has no desire for sex thinks it’s because he has overcome the temptation when in fact he is no longer tempted because he no longer has the biological drive to do such things. 

My point in bringing this up in this thread is that if same sex attraction is controlled by some biological function that the person has no control over then I believe he would be judged differently than a person who does not have that biology. Of course that is speculative since officially we don’t know the cause of same sex attraction. By officially I mean the official stance of the church is that we don’t know the cause. 

I will add that there are many emotional, mental and phycological conditions which control people’s behavior which the person has no control over. These people will not be judged the same as others 

[anatess2]

5 minutes ago, BJ64 said:

Here is what I said “Many people think they are in control of themselves when it’s actually hormones that are controlling them.“

While how you act is under your control, unless you use hormonal intervention you do not control your sex drive. Your hormones control your sex drive whether that be high or low. Your hormones don’t influence your sex drive they control it. Hormones don’t influence a woman’s cycle they control it. A woman can’t just use her willpower to override her monthly cycle. Hormones don’t make a man commit sexual sin but they control is desire or drive to commit such acts. Hence my statement that a man with low testosterone does not have the same challenge that a man with high testosterone has in avoiding sexual sin and that an old man who has no desire for sex thinks it’s because he has overcome the temptation when in fact he is no longer tempted because he no longer has the biological drive to do such things. 

My point in bringing this up in this thread is that if same sex attraction is controlled by some biological function that the person has no control over then I believe he would be judged differently than a person who does not have that biology. Of course that is speculative since officially we don’t know the cause of same sex attraction. By officially I mean the official stance of the church is that we don’t know the cause. 

I will add that there are many emotional, mental and phycological conditions which control people’s behavior which the person has no control over. These people will not be judged the same as others 

That's a given.  

But at the same time, these natural man conditions are not an excuse to surrender to evil doing.

[Grunt]

17 minutes ago, BJ64 said:

Here is what I said “Many people think they are in control of themselves when it’s actually hormones that are controlling them.“

While how you act is under your control, unless you use hormonal intervention you do not control your sex drive. Your hormones control your sex drive whether that be high or low. Your hormones don’t influence your sex drive they control it. Hormones don’t influence a woman’s cycle they control it. A woman can’t just use her willpower to override her monthly cycle. Hormones don’t make a man commit sexual sin but they control is desire or drive to commit such acts. Hence my statement that a man with low testosterone does not have the same challenge that a man with high testosterone has in avoiding sexual sin and that an old man who has no desire for sex thinks it’s because he has overcome the temptation when in fact he is no longer tempted because he no longer has the biological drive to do such things. 

My point in bringing this up in this thread is that if same sex attraction is controlled by some biological function that the person has no control over then I believe he would be judged differently than a person who does not have that biology. Of course that is speculative since officially we don’t know the cause of same sex attraction. By officially I mean the official stance of the church is that we don’t know the cause. 

I will add that there are many emotional, mental and phycological conditions which control people’s behavior which the person has no control over. These people will not be judged the same as others 

My sex drive doesn't control me.  I control my behavior.

Edited July 19, 2018 by Grunt

[estradling75]

15 minutes ago, BJ64 said:

Here is what I said “Many people think they are in control of themselves when it’s actually hormones that are controlling them.“

 

This is a fundamentally wrong statement when we are taking about actions.  Yes hormones control biological process.  They do not control how we choose to respond to such processes inf

 

11 minutes ago, BJ64 said:

While how you act is under your control, unless you use hormonal intervention you do not control your sex drive. Your hormones control your sex drive whether that be high or low. Your hormones don’t influence your sex drive they control it. Hormones don’t influence a woman’s cycle they control it. A woman can’t just use her willpower to override her monthly cycle. Hormones don’t make a man commit sexual sin but they control is desire or drive to commit such acts. Hence my statement that a man with low testosterone does not have the same challenge that a man with high testosterone has in avoiding sexual sin and that an old man who has no desire for sex thinks it’s because he has overcome the temptation when in fact he is no longer tempted because he no longer has the biological drive to do such things.

Which while true is not relevant...  It is very clear that everyone has different temptations and different levels of the same temptations...   we do not get an excuse because  "Well my temptation in this matter was stronger then the average person has..."  That simply does not fly. 

Bottom line is while you might not control how strong your sex drive is you absolutely control your actions in regard to its influence 

 

15 minutes ago, BJ64 said:

My point in bringing this up in this thread is that if same sex attraction is controlled by some biological function that the person has no control over then I believe he would be judged differently than a person who does not have that biology. Of course that is speculative since officially we don’t know the cause of same sex attraction. By officially I mean the official stance of the church is that we don’t know the cause.

Which is the church's current teaching. The church currently is pretty clear that having a same sex attraction is not a sin... acting on it is.  If you have the a same sex attraction but never act on it you have resisted temptation.  It does not matter how hard the temptation is... how much your biology might want it.  You control your actions

 

21 minutes ago, BJ64 said:

I will add that there are many emotional, mental and phycological conditions which control people’s behavior which the person has no control over. These people will not be judged the same as others 

In as much as they really are a "Control" and not an "Influence"  you are correct.  And in many cases only God will truly know if it is a control.  For all practical purposes we need to wear out our lives trying to do everything we can that God commands.  This means treating everything as being within our control (aka an influence) no matter how hard it seems and then let God judge our effort

It is Satan that wants us to think we do not have a choice. Do not have options. That we are simply born this way,  and should give up and give in, that it is simply to hard to do.

[anatess2]

26 minutes ago, Grunt said:

My sex drive doesn't control me.  I control my behavior.

This used to be the very definition of a Manly Man or a Womanly Woman or even the more generic Civilized.

This new-fangled... "Be Yourself" and "I identify as..." are weaknesses.

[BJ64]

1 hour ago, Grunt said:

My sex drive doesn't control me.  I control my behavior.

But you do not control your sex drive. By this I mean you do not control how strong it is. 

[carlimac]

On 7/16/2018 at 10:01 PM, BJ64 said:

Here is an interesting essay on this topic. 

https://mormonlgbtquestions.com/

 

I started to read this essay. My first impression was that it leaned toward the defensive. Naturally it would when the man that wrote it has two gay sons. Some of what he said didn't ring true to me. SO I didn't read the whole thing. I recommend the written works of Ty Mansfield (  voicesofhope.org  ) who is following the church leaders pretty closely in everything he writes. I also would recommend reading what the church is publishing currently on these issues rather than seeking out private blogs or opinions (other than Ty Mansfield). I never fail to feel the spirit confirming what out Prophet says. Private blogs, not so much. Even this opinion piece by the father of gay sons. I can totally understand the almost subconcious need to protect his sons and himself when a lot of blame can sometimes fall on parental relationships. 

I can't imagine how hard it is for the parents. I don't have that challenge with my own 7 kids but may with grandchildren, especially since it's becoming so much more acceptable to experiment with homosexuality in society. And I lean toward believing Travelor's  explanation of learned behavior and learned feelings ( for whatever reason)  over the "born that way" theory.

Edited July 19, 2018 by carlimac

[Grunt]

57 minutes ago, BJ64 said:

But you do not control your sex drive. By this I mean you do not control how strong it is. 

Who cares?  My sex drive doesn't control me.

[Vort]

2 minutes ago, Grunt said:

Who cares?  My sex drive doesn't control me.

That's just low testosterone talking. If you had as much testosterone surging through your manly veins as, say, BJ64, you would understand.

[Grunt]

Just now, Vort said:

That's just low testosterone talking. If you had as much testosterone surging through your manly veins as, say, BJ64, you would understand.

IT'S NOT A DRESS, IT'S A KILT!!!!!!

[Rob Osborn]

27 minutes ago, carlimac said:

 

I started to read this essay. My first impression was that it leaned toward the defensive. Naturally it would when the man that wrote it has two gay sons. Some of what he said didn't ring true to me. SO I didn't read the whole thing. I recommend the written works of Ty Mansfield (  voicesofhope.org  ) who is following the church leaders pretty closely in everything he writes. I also would recommend reading what the church is publishing currently on these issues rather than seeking out private blogs or opinions (other than Ty Mansfield). I never fail to feel the spirit confirming what out Prophet says. Private blogs, not so much. Even this opinion piece by the father of gay sons. I can totally understand the almost subconcious need to protect his sons and himself when a lot of blame can sometimes fall on parental relationships. 

I can't imagine how hard it is for the parents. I don't have that challenge with my own 7 kids but may with grandchildren, especially since it's becoming so much more acceptable to experiment with homosexuality in society. And I lean toward believing Travelor's  explanation of learned behavior and learned feelings ( for whatever reason)  over the "born that way" theory.

I couldn't get through the defensive topic- way too long. I am a firm believer that mostly it's a learned behavior and what is acceptable. It never fails me to be reminded of my neighbors who were a happy family with 5 children, married in the temple, etc, and then one day the father decided he was a woman which greatly upset his wife but after a couple years she decided she was a man so they think they got it all worked out. They hate the church now and are anarchists who post anti-mormon material and transgender speech. Some say the road to hell is paved with good intentions, in reality though, the road to hell is paved with lies, deceit, and vain philosophies.