Meridian Magazine: Can You Help Your Children Choose Heterosexuality? (Answer: Yes)

[jkwilliams]

Before intensive Christian missionising c. 1980, boys in many parts of Melanesia were successfully socialised through a complex network of myth, ritual, narrative, and societal expectations to privilege male/male relations as the primary mode of sexual expression. How do you think they would have answered this question?

Sexual behavior is not the same as sexual orientation.

[jkwilliams]

Everyone is familiar with the idea that LDS who feel homosexual desires should choose not to act on those desires.

The problem is that the article goes way beyond that. It presents those desires in the context of them being created from the attitudes (and bedtime stories?) of their childhood.  That for many homosexuals, there is a pull between heterosexuality and homosexuality, and parents can tip the scales in favor of heterosexuality.

 

There are people like that.  They're called bi-sexual.  For them, it truly is a choice whether they'll have sex with a man or woman; they are attracted to both.

 

But Sister Smith presents the theory that how we treat our children can have a direct influence on whether they choose to be attracted to men or women in the future:

 

 

 

 

My head actually hurts when I try to read that.  How could a sane person (who claims to actually be a mental health professional) write something like that?  The desire to be a mother or father is unrelated to homosexual (or heterosexual) feelings.  This is proven by the heterosexual people who don't want kids, and the many, many gay people who do want kids (and have them!)

 

I honestly wonder if she had ever met and spent time around adult homosexuals.  Especially those who adopt and raise children.

I'm reminded of the story I posted about the boys in the Dominican Republic who appear to be female until they reach puberty, when they suddenly develop penis and testicles. As the article makes clear, even though these boys are raised as girls--and that involves the kinds of attitudes and teachings the Meridian article advocates--these boys know they're different. No amount of coaching or modeling is going to change who and what they are inside, even though they don't have male genitals until later.

The problem with this article is that it suggests to parents that they can teach their kids to be heterosexual through modeling and instruction, as long as their kids aren't "genetically" predisposed to homosexuality. That puts an unrealistic expectation on the part of parents because parents have no way to determine whether their kids are genetically predisposed to homosexuality or not. For that matter, not even the most experienced scientists can make that determination. So, the default assumption from parents is going to be, "My kids are not predisposed to be gay, so I will teach them to be heterosexual." What happens if one of those kids is gay (even, taking the author's word for it, genetically predisposed)? When that kid comes out to his or her parents, the article tells them not to worry, that they can teach their gay kids to choose heterosexuality. How exactly does one do that? Even "reparative therapy" is only "successful" in that a small percentage of people who go through it are able to suppress their same-sex attraction. So, the likely outcomes are either a) your kid suppresses his or her desire and lives a life of celibacy or b) your kid can't suppress it, and you feel like you've failed as a parent. Neither is a happy outcome.

Edited September 30, 2015 by jkwilliams

[thesometimesaint]

It's been a while since Merdian surprised me.  Consider me surprised!

 

 

 

 

I don't plan on teaching my children they "have a choice", but if any other parents do have this conversation with their children (especially their homosexual children), please let us know how it goes!

 

 

 

 

I'm not entirely clear on her theory, so can someone explain if it would also be possible for pornography or sexual abuse to trigger someone away from homosexuality as well?

 

I'm very skeptical. If true it would be possible to counsel your children out of heterosexuality into homosexuality.

[Gray]

"Selfish gratification" is what those other people do. "Godly expression" is what we do. If only they could be more like us!

[ALarson]

Looks like the article has mercifully been withdrawn.

Yep, looks like they pulled it and that's good:

 

http://ldsmag.com/helping-our-children-choose-heterosexuality/

[Scott Lloyd]

I'm very skeptical. If true it would be possible to counsel your children out of heterosexuality into homosexuality.

For someone with a bisexual orientation, that would be quite possible. Theoretically, such an individual could go either way, right?

 

I'm asking, because the default assumption here seems to be that one is either 100 percent homosexual or 100 percent heterosexual. Yet we know that many individuals self-identify as bi-sexual.

Edited September 30, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[BlueDreams]

In follow-up to this post, we got off on a tangent about word choice, which was not my intent (I'm willing to drop the word "suppress" if it carries too much baggage), and I feel that the point I was trying to make got pushed aside.

 

Are there not among us those who self-identify as being bi-sexual, who have some measure of same-sex attraction but also have enough of attraction for the opposite sex that they could be encouraged and helped to emphasize that part of their nature to the point that they could have a wholesome and lasting marriage as God ordains marriage to be (see "The Family: a Proclamation to the World")? Hasn't there been a man who has spoken a couple of times at the FairMormon Conference (and pardon, but I don't recall his name at the moment) who has demonstrated in his own life this possibility?

 

And maybe the Meridian article is not the best way to accomplish such encouragement, but do we need to discard the concept altogether?

I've heard Ty speak and direct several conferences on this topic. Knowing him and his story fairly well, I think he would answer no to your above questions (he would probably have more words than "no" thrown in there). Plus I get the sense that Ty is more facilitative or collaborative in his practice than directive.  This is also reductionist to the idea that sexual desire is complex because it assumes that there is one method or one way in which a person should reach for said goal. Plus Ty when he did ID, it was not bi but gay.  

 

Personally, if I met someone who was bi, I would give them the space to accept what that means for them and then help them to ID their value structure and help the two come together in a way that doesn't entail warring between the two but acceptance and honor of both. I guess my main concern is that the idea you present places other individuals in an expert role over someone else's sexuality....and we have a TON of cultural baggage surrounding sexuality and marriage that honestly I would be nervous to have anyone take up that role that you suggest. We're the sort that saying the word "sexuality" and "sex" in church during a Law of chastity lesson can make heads turn in surprise. And where discussing my cousin coming out to me can lead to an audible gasp. (I'm not exaggerating, this happened to me in church in the last 2 weeks). So honestly, for most saints who may be helping them along with this or guiding them to a place where they could marry...it sounds more like the blind leading the blind to me....which is why I'm leery of the idea.  

 

With luv,

BD

Edited September 30, 2015 by BlueDreams

[thesometimesaint]

For someone with a bisexual orientation, that would be quite possible. Theoretically, such an individual could go either way, right?

 

I'm asking, because the default assumption here seems to be that one is either 100 percent homosexual or 100 percent heterosexual. Yet we know that many individuals self-identify as bi-sexual.

 

This is where it gets complicated. We generally don't speak in terms of 100% anything in the psychology about sexual identification. It is more like a slanted bell shaped curve with the overwhelming preponderance of the population as heterosexual. Add in the religio-cultural stigma attached to homosexuality it makes determining sexual orientation based on self identification difficult. Attitudes are changing quickly particularly among young adults.

[california boy]

I am not quite sure how to put this so its coming from heart and it might be torn apart by those to whom this just an intellectual discussion based on reason and logic.  I hope you all realize that souls and precious children are involved in this.  I am the dad of a 15 year old gay son trying as hard as I can to figure out how to raise him so that he can have a relationship with his Father in Heaven when there are almost no real answers about why or how he can live his life happily and fully in the Church.  I have had a member of the First Quorum of the seventy spend an afternoon in our house listening to our questions and at the end of the day tell us that the leaders of the Church just don't have many of the answers right now. They are praying constantly for guidance but it hasn't fully come.  This article is so full of half truths and insinuations that have been tossed at our family over and over again.  I have personally seen the damage that such articles and thoughts do to our gay members of the Church.  Such articles do not bring peace and the ideas presented simply do not work.  The writer has no real evidence that her ideas work.  She has never put them in practice.  it is simply her theory. I wish that before someone published such an article, they would take the time to really try to apply their theories and see if they work.  I understand the outrage voiced over this article.  It is so very clear that the writer has no real experience and is simply perpetuating so many myths that Mormon's desperately cling too because they simply cannot believe Heavenly Father would allow someone to be born gay.

 

After 100 post on this article, yours is the only one that really matters.  First I want to tell you the article is nonsense.  Yeah all of it.  Don't believe for a minute that you did something to make your son gay by the way he was raised.  And don't believe there is anything you can do to change your son to somehow be heterosexual  That is not how it works.

 

Your son has some difficult choices to make about how he will live his life.  But they are entirely his choices and his agency.  Each of us has to work out our own salvation.  Our parents can't do it for us.  Our church leaders can't do it for us.  Only we can work out our salvation.  Counsel him to listen to the Spirit in the choices he makes.  They may very well be different for him then expectations of others.  As you have already found out, the expectations of others can be toxic.  If they haven't dealt with this issue, they really have no understanding of it.  It is all just a theory where they piece together scriptures and talks to try and come up with some design that fits the answers they want to a very complexed issue.  Like the member of the first quorum of 70 said.  The church is struggling to find the answers.  If they don't have the answers to your sons questions, I doubt very much that a poster on this board or a person writing a magazine article is going to quote a scripture or talk that will make any sense to your son.

 

For you and your family, the choices are much more clear and much easier to deal with.  You have only one responsibility, and that is to love him completely.  He is your son.  He needs your faith and guidance no matter what the end result is.  Eternity is a long time.  Encourage your son to trust in God.  And then follow that same advice and trust God in guiding your actions.  Is all I can say is that the greatest tool you have is your love as his father.  Use that tool wisely.  It is by far a better tool than bitterness and condemnation.  It took my own father 15 years to understand that.

[stemelbow]

kimpearson:

 

I have had a member of the First Quorum of the seventy spend an afternoon in our house listening to our questions and at the end of the day tell us that the leaders of the Church just don't have many of the answers right now. They are praying constantly for guidance but it hasn't fully come.

this is one of the most encouraging pieces of info I've heart on this topic as it relates to the church as anything. Someone in a high level position suggesting there is more to learn, prayers are enlisted to learn more. Perhaps we will see a corner turned and we'll see some major shifts in opinion just like we did with blacks and the priesthood when prayer after prayer were allegedly made on that matter.

I hope this GA spoke genuinely when he suggested the above. I too think there is way too much we don't know about this. And we should not speak presumptuously on this matter. I'm eager to see where the Church ends up on this in the years to come.

Man, I just think we are so heavily soaked in tradition and culture, so heavily influenced by our assumptions. One day we'll be able to see better. That day doesn't appear to be today.

Edited September 30, 2015 by stemelbow

[jkwilliams]

kimpearson:

 

this is one of the most encouraging pieces of info I've heart on this topic as it relates to the church as anything. Someone in a high level position suggesting there is more to learn, prayers are enlisted to learn more. Perhaps we will see a corner turned and we'll see some major shifts in opinion just like we did with blacks and the priesthood when prayer after prayer were allegedly made on that matter.

I hope this GA spoke genuinely when he suggested the above. I too think there is way too much we don't know about this. And we should not speak presumptuously on this matter. I'm eager to see where the Church ends up on this in the years to come.

Man, I just think we are so heavily soaked in tradition and culture, so heavily influenced by our assumptions. One day we'll be able to see better. That day doesn't appear to be today.

That is encouraging, indeed. There is so much we don't know, and each family and individual circumstance is different. What is needed is compassion, clear thinking, and a willingness to find a way forward for each person.

[BlueDreams]

I am not quite sure how to put this so its coming from heart and it might be torn apart by those to whom this just an intellectual discussion based on reason and logic.  I hope you all realize that souls and precious children are involved in this.  I am the dad of a 15 year old gay son trying as hard as I can to figure out how to raise him so that he can have a relationship with his Father in Heaven when there are almost no real answers about why or how he can live his life happily and fully in the Church.  I have had a member of the First Quorum of the seventy spend an afternoon in our house listening to our questions and at the end of the day tell us that the leaders of the Church just don't have many of the answers right now. They are praying constantly for guidance but it hasn't fully come.  This article is so full of half truths and insinuations that have been tossed at our family over and over again.  I have personally seen the damage that such articles and thoughts do to our gay members of the Church.  Such articles do not bring peace and the ideas presented simply do not work.  The writer has no real evidence that her ideas work.  She has never put them in practice.  it is simply her theory. I wish that before someone published such an article, they would take the time to really try to apply their theories and see if they work.  I understand the outrage voiced over this article.  It is so very clear that the writer has no real experience and is simply perpetuating so many myths that Mormon's desperately cling too because they simply cannot believe Heavenly Father would allow someone to be born gay.

 

I wasn't going to mention anything, because I don't think there are any specific words that can make this ok and for your son to have the life you may have seen for him, etc. When my cousin told me, we chatted for a bit and I told her that i hope she would feel comfortable telling me her differences and the things that she decides for herself in her life because I needed to learn from her as much as she may need to learn from me...that we could learn together. I also had a sadness that came over me that I wasn't expecting for a day or 2. I couldn't name it exactly...I'd known several people who fell on the LGBT/SGA experience, but I realized there was no one that I sincerely loved and cared for intimately as much as I do her. And her choice currently was to also not be LDS...that was the part, I think, that made me sad.

 

Personally, what has helped me to understand or broaden my perspective was always stories. I prefer learning from people. Here are 2 sites that I like for just that:

 

http://farbetweenmovie.com/#8 - This site has a range of LGBT/SGA LDS experiences that range from currently very active, to have left the church, to everything in between.

 

http://www.ldsvoicesofhope.org/voices.php  - this one focuses on ones who are currently LDS and their journey with that.

 

Take care and I wish you the best.

With luv,

BD

[HappyJackWagon]

After 100 post on this article, yours is the only one that really matters.  First I want to tell you the article is nonsense.  Yeah all of it.  Don't believe for a minute that you did something to make your son gay by the way he was raised.  And don't believe there is anything you can do to change your son to somehow be heterosexual  That is not how it works.

 

Your son has some difficult choices to make about how he will live his life.  But they are entirely his choices and his agency.  Each of us has to work out our own salvation.  Our parents can't do it for us.  Our church leaders can't do it for us.  Only we can work out our salvation.  Counsel him to listen to the Spirit in the choices he makes.  They may very well be different for him then expectations of others.  As you have already found out, the expectations of others can be toxic.  If they haven't dealt with this issue, they really have no understanding of it.  It is all just a theory where they piece together scriptures and talks to try and come up with some design that fits the answers they want to a very complexed issue.  Like the member of the first quorum of 70 said.  The church is struggling to find the answers.  If they don't have the answers to your sons questions, I doubt very much that a poster on this board or a person writing a magazine article is going to quote a scripture or talk that will make any sense to your son.

 

For you and your family, the choices are much more clear and much easier to deal with.  You have only one responsibility, and that is to love him completely.  He is your son.  He needs your faith and guidance no matter what the end result is.  Eternity is a long time.  Encourage your son to trust in God.  And then follow that same advice and trust God in guiding your actions.  Is all I can say is that the greatest tool you have is your love as his father.  Use that tool wisely.  It is by far a better tool than bitterness and condemnation.  It took my own father 15 years to understand that.

In the church we often act like we have ALL the answers. We don't. When we recognize that, we are in a much better position to offer unconditional love and acceptance.

 

I refuse to judge gays and their activity level in the church or their observance of the law of chastity because the church has not clearly answered the following questions. (I hope I don't offend anyone with the way I phrase these questions)

 

1- Is being gay a natural part of creation?

   a- If so, how does a gay person fullfill the measure of his/her creation based on current church teachings?

   b- If so, what is the role of gays in the eternities? Are they meant to be alone forever or can they engage in lating, loving physical relationships?

 

2- If being gay is not a natural part of creation, do individuals stop being gay in the afterlife?

    a- If so, where is the revelation stating so?

    b- If not, how can a gay person have any hope for happiness in an eternity void of intimate relationships? Are they a mistake or just collateral damage in God's plan of happiness?

 

3- How does God account for the 1-2% of his children who are gay?

    a- Are they a mistake of nature that will be corrected with the resurrection?

    b- Is there a separate plan for their eternal progression or do they follow the same rules as everyone else? Marriage, family, godhood etc?

 

4- The most basic question underlying most of these other questions is this. Is being gay a mortal condition that gays should expect to overcome in the next life or is an eternal expression of their creation?

 

I have my opinions on all of these but the church has no difinitive answers. Yet policy is set as if there is. There is too much we don't know to draw any final conclusions from a church perspective.

[CV75]

In the church we often act like we have ALL the answers. We don't. When we recognize that, we are in a much better position to offer unconditional love and acceptance.

 

***

 

I have my opinions on all of these but the church has no difinitive answers. Yet policy is set as if there is. There is too much we don't know to draw any final conclusions from a church perspective.

Consistent with what I wrote in #91 on a personal level, God gives us (at least) two kinds of answers: explanations and guidance. The policy reflects the guidance from above, not the explanation. As with individuals, the Church makes correct and faithful decisions without clear explanations, yet at the same time with crystal-clear guidance from the Lord (these are two different types of answers). No one need break himself against the doctrines we do have and the policy in place, as there certainly remains comfort and perspective to be found in the Lord, for all involved.

[cinepro]

Yep, looks like they pulled it and that's good:

 

http://ldsmag.com/helping-our-children-choose-heterosexuality/

 

It's good, but they should have a notice at the site explaining what was pulled, and why.   It's a little cowardly to just delete it from the website (and the Facebook page) along with all the comments and pretend like it never existed.

[ttribe]

It's good, but they should have a notice at the site explaining what was pulled, and why.   It's a little cowardly to just delete it from the website (and the Facebook page) along with all the comments and pretend like it never existed.

 

We've always been at war with Eastasia.

[Bobbieaware]

In the church we often act like we have ALL the answers. We don't. When we recognize that, we are in a much better position to offer unconditional love and acceptance.

 

I refuse to judge gays and their activity level in the church or their observance of the law of chastity because the church has not clearly answered the following questions. (I hope I don't offend anyone with the way I phrase these questions)

 

1- Is being gay a natural part of creation?

   a- If so, how does a gay person fullfill the measure of his/her creation based on current church teachings?

   b- If so, what is the role of gays in the eternities? Are they meant to be alone forever or can they engage in lating, loving physical relationships?

 

2- If being gay is not a natural part of creation, do individuals stop being gay in the afterlife?

    a- If so, where is the revelation stating so?

    b- If not, how can a gay person have any hope for happiness in an eternity void of intimate relationships? Are they a mistake or just collateral damage in God's plan of happiness?

 

3- How does God account for the 1-2% of his children who are gay?

    a- Are they a mistake of nature that will be corrected with the resurrection?

    b- Is there a separate plan for their eternal progression or do they follow the same rules as everyone else? Marriage, family, godhood etc?

 

4- The most basic question underlying most of these other questions is this. Is being gay a mortal condition that gays should expect to overcome in the next life or is an eternal expression of their creation?

 

I have my opinions on all of these but the church has no difinitive answers. Yet policy is set as if there is. There is too much we don't know to draw any final conclusions from a church perspective.

God structured his universe upon an everlasting and immutable principle of opposition in all things. For this reason, he commanded all of his children to engage in male/female coupling through the institution of committed marriage so as to make it possible for men and women to multiply and replenish the earth with children in a manner that accords to his will (and to ultimately bring about the continuation of populating new worlds in eternity). For these reasons, I believe same sex attraction is a manifestation of the carnal nature that came about as a consequence of the fall of man; and except for the sons of perdition, all will eventually be healed from the effects of the fall when all things are set in their proper order and all men and women are reconciled to the will of God as a prerequisite to being forgiven and entering a post-resurrection kingdom of heavenly glory. This is my carefully considered opinion -- an opinion that accords with the scriptures and the counsel of the living prophets of God.

[Buckeye]

God structured his universe upon an everlasting and immutable principle of opposition in all things. For this reason, he commanded all of his children to engage in male/female coupling through the institution of committed marriage so as to make it possible for men and women to multiply and replenish the earth with children in a manner that accords to his will (and to ultimately bring about the continuation of populating new worlds in eternity). For these reasons, I believe same sex attraction is a manifestation of the carnal nature that came about as a consequence of the fall of man; and except for the sons of perdition, all will eventually be healed from the effects of the fall when all things are set in their proper order and all men and women are reconciled to the will of God as a prerequisite to being forgiven and entering a post-resurrection kingdom of heavenly glory. This is my carefully considered opinion -- an opinion that accords with the scriptures and the counsel of the living prophets of God.

 

Or maybe SSA stands in opposition to heterosexual attraction and heaven requires the inclusion of both sides of this "opposition" in order to be complete. Makes about as much sense.

[KevinG]

Let's look at this through two lenses...

 

1- Is being an alcoholic a natural part of creation?

   a- If so, how does a alcoholic person fullfill the measure of his/her creation based on current church teachings?

   b- If so, what is the role of alcoholics in the eternities? Are they meant to be addicted forever or can they engage in sobriety?

 

2- If being alcoholic is not a natural part of creation, do individuals stop being alcoholic in the afterlife?

    a- If so, where is the revelation stating so?

    b- If not, how can a alcoholic person have any hope for happiness in an eternity void of imbibing? Are they a mistake or just collateral damage in God's plan of happiness?

 

3- How does God account for the 1-2% of his children who are alcoholic?

    a- Are they a mistake of nature that will be corrected with the resurrection?

    b- Is there a separate plan for their eternal progression or do they follow the same rules as everyone else? Word of Wisdom, etc?

 

4- The most basic question underlying most of these other questions is this. Is being alcoholic a mortal condition that alcoholics should expect to overcome in the next life or is an eternal expression of their creation?

 

vs.

 

1- Is being introverted a natural part of creation?

   a- If so, how does an introverted person fullfill the measure of his/her creation based on current church teachings?

   b- If so, what is the role of introverts in the eternities? Are they meant to be alone forever or can they engage in lasting, loving physical relationships?

 

2- If being introverted is not a natural part of creation, do individuals stop being introverted in the afterlife?

    a- If so, where is the revelation stating so?

    b- If not, how can a introverted person have any hope for happiness in an eternity void of intimate relationships? Are they a mistake or just collateral damage in God's plan of happiness?

 

3- How does God account for the 1-2% of his children who are introverted?

    a- Are they a mistake of nature that will be corrected with the resurrection?

    b- Is there a separate plan for their eternal progression or do they follow the same rules as everyone else? Marriage, family, godhood etc?

 

4- The most basic question underlying most of these other questions is this. Is being introverted a mortal condition that introverts should expect to overcome in the next life or is an eternal expression of their creation?

[toon]

 

 

 

 

 

The part about the genetic sense of humor is especially interesting. I have three adopted siblings, and I always wondered why my dad would tell jokes at dinner and I would be laughing uncontrollably while my brothers and sister just sat there looking confused.

 

My wife and I met with our adopted daughter's teacher last year at a "back to school" night.  The teacher went around the room and pointed out how the kids resembled their various parents.  When she got to us, she said something to the effect that she could see my daughter's eyes in my wife and how my nose looked like hers.  The teacher was well-intentioned, and we just chuckled about it afterwards.

 

But the articles claim that there's something special in a birth relationship that cannot exist in an adoptive relationship is mildly offensive.

[HappyJackWagon]

God structured his universe upon an everlasting and immutable principle of opposition in all things. For this reason, he commanded all of his children to engage in male/female coupling through the institution of committed marriage so as to make it possible for men and women to multiply and replenish the earth with children in a manner that accords to his will (and to ultimately bring about the continuation of populating new worlds in eternity). For these reasons, I believe same sex attraction is a manifestation of the carnal nature that came about as a consequence of the fall of man; and except for the sons of perdition, all will eventually be healed from the effects of the fall when all things are set in their proper order and all men and women are reconciled to the will of God as a prerequisite to being forgiven and entering a post-resurrection kingdom of heavenly glory. This is my carefully considered opinion -- an opinion that accords with the scriptures and the counsel of the living prophets of God.

It's a carefully worded opinion, but an opinion nonetheless. Has the church provided any answers to my questions?

[Gray]

God structured his universe upon an everlasting and immutable principle of opposition in all things. For this reason, he commanded all of his children to engage in male/female coupling through the institution of committed marriage so as to make it possible for men and women to multiply and replenish the earth with children in a manner that accords to his will (and to ultimately bring about the continuation of populating new worlds in eternity). For these reasons, I believe same sex attraction is a manifestation of the carnal nature that came about as a consequence of the fall of man; and except for the sons of perdition, all will eventually be healed from the effects of the fall when all things are set in their proper order and all men and women are reconciled to the will of God as a prerequisite to being forgiven and entering a post-resurrection kingdom of heavenly glory. This is my carefully considered opinion -- an opinion that accords with the scriptures and the counsel of the living prophets of God.

 

I don't think "opposition in all things" has the least bit to do with male/female issues. Opposition in all things is usually referring to the dichotomy between good and evil. 

Edited September 30, 2015 by Gray

[Bobbieaware]

Or maybe SSA stands in opposition to heterosexual attraction and heaven requires the inclusion of both sides of this "opposition" in order to be complete. Makes about as much sense.

The problem with your rebuttal is that the things that are in opposition to God's will are considered sinful. The opposite of sobriety is addiction to and near constant intoxication on either alcohol or drugs. So is addiction to alcohol or drugs a good thing just because it is a state of being that stands in opposition to sobriety?

[Gray]

1- Is being introverted a natural part of creation?

   a- If so, how does an introverted person fullfill the measure of his/her creation based on current church teachings?

   b- If so, what is the role of introverts in the eternities? Are they meant to be alone forever or can they engage in lasting, loving physical relationships?

 

2- If being introverted is not a natural part of creation, do individuals stop being introverted in the afterlife?

    a- If so, where is the revelation stating so?

    b- If not, how can a introverted person have any hope for happiness in an eternity void of intimate relationships? Are they a mistake or just collateral damage in God's plan of happiness?

 

3- How does God account for the 1-2% of his children who are introverted?

    a- Are they a mistake of nature that will be corrected with the resurrection?

    b- Is there a separate plan for their eternal progression or do they follow the same rules as everyone else? Marriage, family, godhood etc?

 

4- The most basic question underlying most of these other questions is this. Is being introverted a mortal condition that introverts should expect to overcome in the next life or is an eternal expression of their creation?

 

On the contrary, extroverts are expected to become introverts. To be introverted is next to godliness. Extroversion is an unnatural and unholy condition. 

[Gray]

The problem with your rebuttal is that the things that are in opposition to God's will are considered sinful. The opposite of sobriety is addiction to and near constant intoxication on either alcohol or drugs. So is addiction to alcohol or drugs a good thing just because it is a state of being that stands in opposition to sobriety?

 

 

Right, so are men sinful or are women sinful? Which is the dark side of the gender divide?