Jump to content

Celestial and asexual


Recommended Posts

26 minutes ago, Nofear said:

A common complaint among some of the LGBT community is the idea that one will be made heterosexual in the after life seems repugnant. That complaint does seem to have some merit, but, I think it misses the mark* and puts too much mortality into immortality as it were. My reasoning:

1. While I believe there will be likely be sexual relationships in the eternities, it won't be entirely the same. Celestial beings will have full control of their body. Coitus won't be for the pleasure of the hormonal response we get in mortality (not that such is the only reason for it now). If our post-mortal happiness was contingent upon chemistry and we have full control of our bodies, we could just put ourselves in a state of blissful "high" all the time. Our happiness will transcend the state of our bodies internal chemistry. I won't be sexually attracted at any level to other women (or men). Any attraction chemistry will be a voluntary choice.

2. Love will transcend physical expression and it won't discriminate. Christ loves Ghandi or Mother Teresa just as much as Caiaphas or Hitler. As we approach exaltation, that love will be perfect for everyone. I'll love my spouse just as much as I'll love my elementary school bully. That's not to say there won't be friendships that are different. Christ called his disciples his friends. While I'm trying, I may not exactly be in the friend circle yet. I'll be friends with my spouse and others whom I love each equally as much. That can include men and non-spouse women.

3. Both Heavenly Father and Heavenly Mother are perfect beings. Neither can treat/respond to me better than the other. Their response will always be exactly right. But, there seems to be something about exaltation and having a divine male and female parent that is necessary (D&C 131:1-4). Somehow in their perfection, there is still a difference. What that is, I don't know. For some reason, our species decided on a two sex system (other creatures have different sex arrangements). I don't know why (might be related to the creation of spirit children in some way if any of you recall my opinions on that, /shrug, don't know).

Putting all three items together, the idea of sexual attraction in the celestial kingdom seems entirely moot. I can be friends with men. I can be friends with women. If exalted, there will be something special and different between me and my spouse. But that will not preclude social, non-sexual relationships with my other friends. If I hinge my identity and celestial expectations on my hetero-normative attractions that I experience in mortality now, I think am going to be severely disappointed. The same goes for LGTB individuals. It will be about much, much more than attraction. The Celestial Kingdom: it's not about the sex.

Anyway, that's the thinking I had this morning. Probably has more holes than Swiss cheese. But, pointing those out is one of the things this board is good at. I shan't be offended.

 

* To be fair, I think the idea some early latter-day saints had on sexual relations (particularly polygamists) is also not on the mark.

According to the prophets we will have only flesh and bone bodies, without blood. President Joseph Fielding Smith said:

"After the resurrection from the dead our bodies will be spiritual bodies, but they will be bodies that are tangible, bodies that have been purified, but they will nevertheless be bodies of flesh and bones, but they will not be blood bodies, they will no longer be quickened by blood but quickened by the spirit which is eternal and they shall become immortal and shall never die." (Conference Report 1917 Apr:63) And Joseph Smith said:
"As concerning the resurrection, I will merely say that all men will come from the grave as they lie down, whether old or young; there will not be "added unto their stature one cubit," neither taken from it; all will be raised by the power of God, having spirit in their bodies, and not blood." (History of the Church, 4:555-56.)

Somehow our spirits were created by heavenly parents when they take an already existing intelligence and form it into a spirit. Since there is no blood in the body there most likely is no sperm as well so it has to be done by an entirely different method.

Link to comment

I'm not gonna lie: I read the thread title and said to myself, Welp, I'm half-way there!  (I'll leave it to the reader to guess the "half" to which I refer ...) :huh: :unsure: :unknw: 

:D  :rofl: :D  

Link to comment
1 hour ago, JAHS said:

Somehow our spirits were created by heavenly parents when they take an already existing intelligence and form it into a spirit. Since there is no blood in the body there most likely is no sperm as well so it has to be done by an entirely different method.

There seems to be this implied implied-doctrine that spirit children are formed the same way children are formed here. Through sexual relations. That really hasn’t been revealed as of yet 

It is here, in this unknown doctrine of how spirit children are created/organized, that I leave room for a potential change in the understanding of the family. Please note: I am rather orthodox, I believe in the family proclamation 100% and I’ll back till the day I die (or the day it changes (if it changes)). There have been a lot of deep seeded beliefs in the church that are built on similar implied implied-doctrines (ie origins of black people’s spirits, is plural marriage required for exaltation and every word a prophet says is truth and doctrine, just to name a few)

Edited by Fether
Link to comment

I believe God will not force on his children something that they do not want, nor will they force on Him something that He does not want. 

Link to comment
3 hours ago, Nofear said:

A common complaint among some of the LGBT community is the idea that one will be made heterosexual in the after life seems repugnant. That complaint does seem to have some merit, but, I think it misses the mark* and puts too much mortality into immortality as it were. My reasoning:

1. While I believe there will be likely be sexual relationships in the eternities, it won't be entirely the same. Celestial beings will have full control of their body. Coitus won't be for the pleasure of the hormonal response we get in mortality (not that such is the only reason for it now). If our post-mortal happiness was contingent upon chemistry and we have full control of our bodies, we could just put ourselves in a state of blissful "high" all the time. Our happiness will transcend the state of our bodies internal chemistry. I won't be sexually attracted at any level to other women (or men). Any attraction chemistry will be a voluntary choice.

2. Love will transcend physical expression and it won't discriminate. Christ loves Ghandi or Mother Teresa just as much as Caiaphas or Hitler. As we approach exaltation, that love will be perfect for everyone. I'll love my spouse just as much as I'll love my elementary school bully. That's not to say there won't be friendships that are different. Christ called his disciples his friends. While I'm trying, I may not exactly be in the friend circle yet. I'll be friends with my spouse and others whom I love each equally as much. That can include men and non-spouse women.

3. Both Heavenly Father and Heavenly Mother are perfect beings. Neither can treat/respond to me better than the other. Their response will always be exactly right. But, there seems to be something about exaltation and having a divine male and female parent that is necessary (D&C 131:1-4). Somehow in their perfection, there is still a difference. What that is, I don't know. For some reason, our species decided on a two sex system (other creatures have different sex arrangements). I don't know why (might be related to the creation of spirit children in some way if any of you recall my opinions on that, /shrug, don't know).

Putting all three items together, the idea of sexual attraction in the celestial kingdom seems entirely moot. I can be friends with men. I can be friends with women. If exalted, there will be something special and different between me and my spouse. But that will not preclude social, non-sexual relationships with my other friends. If I hinge my identity and celestial expectations on my hetero-normative attractions that I experience in mortality now, I think am going to be severely disappointed. The same goes for LGTB individuals. It will be about much, much more than attraction. The Celestial Kingdom: it's not about the sex.

Anyway, that's the thinking I had this morning. Probably has more holes than Swiss cheese. But, pointing those out is one of the things this board is good at. I shan't be offended.

 

* To be fair, I think the idea some early latter-day saints had on sexual relations (particularly polygamists) is also not on the mark.

Interesting ideas.

You may be entirely right that from a celestial perspective, it will all make sense and bring joy (whatever that is if it is not chemical).  The difficulty arises in that we are mortal and are subject to chemical influence.  I think the scriptures and prophets appeal to our natural familiar desires as a matter of cultivating hope, giving us a palpable motivation to endure for the purposes of that hope.  In other words, the scriptures do seem to appeal to our familiar chemical mortality in creating hope for immortality.     The difficulty arises for LGBTQ individuals in that it requires a hope in something unfamiliar and even undesirable from their mortal perspective.  I am glad that you give that some merit because it would be nearly impossible to find hope in something that is unfamiliar and even undesirable and potentially repugnant.   It is much easier for the rest of us to find hope in the central feature of the plan of salvation which is the eternal family unit, primary husband and wife as children will have their own.  For us, the carrot in front of the stick is familiar and desirable and therefore acts as a powerful motivational tool to endure for the purpose of that glorious hope.  For us, hope comes naturally, even in our fallen mortal state.  For them, it may not.   

The idea that it puts too much mortality in immortality seems like a fair point, but isn't that exactly how immortality is pitched to us?  It appeals to what we know and love in mortality and just aggrandizes it.  It is mortally familiar for the most part. They don't have that same motivational stand point. 

Link to comment
3 hours ago, Nofear said:

Christ loves Ghandi or Mother Teresa just as much as Caiaphas or Hitler.

I think this depends on how you define love.
 

If part of love is caring about how someone behaves, I would suggest there may be variations of love for at least our mortal selves. It makes little sense to me when speaking of infinite love to say one loves one person more than another.  However, love differently because how one responds to each person is unique…that makes more sense.

Link to comment
3 hours ago, Nofear said:

A common complaint among some of the LGBT community is the idea that one will be made heterosexual in the after life seems repugnant. That complaint does seem to have some merit, but, I think it misses the mark* and puts too much mortality into immortality as it were. My reasoning:

1. While I believe there will be likely be sexual relationships in the eternities, it won't be entirely the same. Celestial beings will have full control of their body. Coitus won't be for the pleasure of the hormonal response we get in mortality (not that such is the only reason for it now).

Well given these statements there may be no such thing as homosexual/heterosexual.  After all, our bodies will be perfected, free from mortal flaws, genetic predispositions, and weaknesses of all kinds.
That would have to include "orientation" which relies on physical attraction.

Instead if we truly become Celestial we will willingly follow whatever the Celestial law of family will be and what we call our orientation here will be moot.
So IF the Celestial law turns out to only allow a male/female family unit that's what we'll follow.  If it has other options (and I see no indication it does) then I suppose we'll follow that too.

Certainly some of our early beliefs record this idea.

  • When God sets up any portion of His Kingdom upon the earth, it is patterned after his own order in the heavens. When He gives to man a pattern of family organization on the earth that pattern will be just like his own family organization in the heavens. The family of Abraham was a transcript of a celestial pattern. . .This family order of Abraham was spread out before God, and met with His entire and full approbation. And why did God approve of it? Because it is the only order practiced in the celestial heavens, and the only peaceful, united, and prosperous order that will endure, while man invented orders and devices will utterly deceive and perish with the using. - Orson Spencer

  • The Lord has commanded us to have our wives and children sealed to us for time and eternity, that we may have them with us in our family organizations in the resurrection, to dwell with forever in the eternal worlds, that we may have an increase of posterity forever in connection with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and an the ancient patriarchs. And God our heavenly Father, knowing that this is the only law, ordained by the Gods of eternity, that would exalt immortal beings to kingdoms, thrones, principalities, powers and dominions, and heirs of God and joint heirs with Jesus Christ to a fullness of Celestial Glory - Wilford Woodruff

Link to comment
8 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

Well given these statements there may be no such thing as homosexual/heterosexual.  After all, our bodies will be perfected, free from mortal flaws, genetic predispositions, and weaknesses of all kinds.
That would have to include "orientation" which relies on physical attraction.

Instead if we truly become Celestial we will willingly follow whatever the Celestial law of family will be and what we call our orientation here will be moot.
So IF the Celestial law turns out to only allow a male/female family unit that's what we'll follow.  If it has other options (and I see no indication it does) then I suppose we'll follow that too.

Certainly some of our early beliefs record this idea.

  • When God sets up any portion of His Kingdom upon the earth, it is patterned after his own order in the heavens. When He gives to man a pattern of family organization on the earth that pattern will be just like his own family organization in the heavens. The family of Abraham was a transcript of a celestial pattern. . .This family order of Abraham was spread out before God, and met with His entire and full approbation. And why did God approve of it? Because it is the only order practiced in the celestial heavens, and the only peaceful, united, and prosperous order that will endure, while man invented orders and devices will utterly deceive and perish with the using. - Orson Spencer

  • The Lord has commanded us to have our wives and children sealed to us for time and eternity, that we may have them with us in our family organizations in the resurrection, to dwell with forever in the eternal worlds, that we may have an increase of posterity forever in connection with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, and an the ancient patriarchs. And God our heavenly Father, knowing that this is the only law, ordained by the Gods of eternity, that would exalt immortal beings to kingdoms, thrones, principalities, powers and dominions, and heirs of God and joint heirs with Jesus Christ to a fullness of Celestial Glory - Wilford Woodruff

While I quite agree with Bro. Spencer and Pres. Woodruff, the statements are assertions not explanations. Just to reiterate, my original post in no way faults our theology. Instead it faults the LGBT community's complaint that our theology would force people to be heterosexual in the afterlife. I think the complaint misunderstands things and is a red herring.

Link to comment
16 minutes ago, Nofear said:

While I quite agree with Bro. Spencer and Pres. Woodruff, the statements are assertions not explanations. Just to reiterate, my original post in no way faults our theology. Instead it faults the LGBT community's complaint that our theology would force people to be heterosexual in the afterlife. I think the complaint misunderstands things and is a red herring.

I agree.
I don't think "sexual orientation" of any sort will be a function of our resurrected Celestial bodies.  Instead we will operate based on eternal law, whatever the eternal law that applies to families may be.
And according to revelation received so far at least (dating all the way back to Genesis) the plan is that man and woman should be together.  That's the only family pattern God has ever revealed - male and female.
If there is another he's never allowed for it.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Bernard Gui said:

I believe God will not force on his children something that they do not want, nor will they force on Him something that He does not want. 

I agree. If a certain law exists, and should an individual not wish to live said law, they will be placed in a kingdom where said law does not need to be lived (Doctrine and Covenants 88:22-24)

Edited by Fether
Link to comment

Randomish thoughts.

Re 1. This sounds rather like St. Augustine's view of sex before the fall. [quote="St. Augustine"]In Eden, it would have been possible to beget offspring without foul lust. The sexual organs would have been stimulated into necessary activity by will-power alone, just as the will controls other organs. Then, without being goaded on by the allurement of passion, the husband could have relaxed upon his wife's breasts with complete peace of mind and bodily tranquility, that part of his body not activated by tumultuous passion, but brought into service by the deliberate use of power when the need arose, the seed dispatched into the womb with no loss of his wife's virginity. So, the two sexes could have come together for impregnation and conception by an act of will, rather than by lustful cravings (City of God, Book 14, Chapter 26).[/quote] I don't know how true it is. Personally, I tend to think there is something eternal about passion and desire, but that could just be wishful thinking.

Re 2. A lot has been said about different kinds of love. This seems to suggest our aim is to eventually "overcome" all of the "inferior" kinds of love (erotic, romantic, philial) in favor of charity for all. Again, I tend to think that we will still experience these different kinds of love (including the erotic), but I don't know exactly what that looks like or if it's even true. I will say that, after years in a sexless marriage (with no intention of leaving), I feel like I am getting a good head start on this (maybe even a bigger head start than @Kenngo1969), because I already have significant experience with suppressing the sexual desire in favor of other, "superior" kinds of love. (At the same time, I am not convinced that this is at all what God intended. It's an interesting discussion that crops up in LDS and Christian sexology circles).

Another thought. There might be something eternally impossible about same sex marriages -- something special about male-female marriage that makes it eternal. It seems all speculative to me. Even so, if, as you hypothesize, we become essentially asexual in the next life -- all of our relationships effectively become Platonic -- why oppose the marriages of same-sex couples in this life? If sexual desires and passions are going to be purged from our relationships eventually, what is the harm in letting two men or two women make a lifelong, monogamous commitment to each other and experience the growth that comes from marriage?

When all is said and done, the one thing that the OP confirms to me is that we still do not have a comprehensive, unified theology of sexuality. There is still a lot we don't really know.

 

Link to comment
39 minutes ago, MrShorty said:

I will say that, after years in a sexless marriage (with no intention of leaving), I feel like I am getting a good head start on this (maybe even a bigger head start than @Kenngo1969), because I already have significant experience with suppressing the sexual desire in favor of other, "superior" kinds of love.

I'm not you, so I have no idea what your experience has been (and perhaps no basis for comparison, as a result) but, I just ... doubt it.  I just ... doubt it. ;) 

Link to comment
7 hours ago, Nofear said:

While I quite agree with Bro. Spencer and Pres. Woodruff, the statements are assertions not explanations. Just to reiterate, my original post in no way faults our theology. Instead it faults the LGBT community's complaint that our theology would force people to be heterosexual in the afterlife. I think the complaint misunderstands things and is a red herring.

Well that is a major problem if you are gay.  Heaven is where your family and loved ones are. I plan on spending eternity with my partner, the person I love.   That one qualifier keeps me out of the Celestial Kingdom.  

Link to comment
9 hours ago, Nofear said:

Just to reiterate, my original post in no way faults our theology. Instead it faults the LGBT community's complaint that our theology would force people to be heterosexual in the afterlife.

Yep, there is no reason to expect that any socially constructed sexual identity that is less than 150 years old is going to be a part of the next life. Standard 'heterosexual' behaviour is antithetical to the teachings of Christ:

Quote

And he that looketh upon a woman to lust after her shall deny the faith, and shall not have the Spirit; and if he repents not he shall be cast out.

 

Link to comment
On 7/15/2021 at 9:37 AM, Nofear said:

A common complaint among some of the LGBT community is the idea that one will be made heterosexual in the after life seems repugnant. That complaint does seem to have some merit, but, I think it misses the mark* and puts too much mortality into immortality as it were. My reasoning:

1. While I believe there will be likely be sexual relationships in the eternities, it won't be entirely the same. Celestial beings will have full control of their body. Coitus won't be for the pleasure of the hormonal response we get in mortality (not that such is the only reason for it now). If our post-mortal happiness was contingent upon chemistry and we have full control of our bodies, we could just put ourselves in a state of blissful "high" all the time. Our happiness will transcend the state of our bodies internal chemistry. I won't be sexually attracted at any level to other women (or men). Any attraction chemistry will be a voluntary choice.

2. Love will transcend physical expression and it won't discriminate. Christ loves Ghandi or Mother Teresa just as much as Caiaphas or Hitler. As we approach exaltation, that love will be perfect for everyone. I'll love my spouse just as much as I'll love my elementary school bully. That's not to say there won't be friendships that are different. Christ called his disciples his friends. While I'm trying, I may not exactly be in the friend circle yet. I'll be friends with my spouse and others whom I love each equally as much. That can include men and non-spouse women.

3. Both Heavenly Father and Heavenly Mother are perfect beings. Neither can treat/respond to me better than the other. Their response will always be exactly right. But, there seems to be something about exaltation and having a divine male and female parent that is necessary (D&C 131:1-4). Somehow in their perfection, there is still a difference. What that is, I don't know. For some reason, our species decided on a two sex system (other creatures have different sex arrangements). I don't know why (might be related to the creation of spirit children in some way if any of you recall my opinions on that, /shrug, don't know).

Putting all three items together, the idea of sexual attraction in the celestial kingdom seems entirely moot. I can be friends with men. I can be friends with women. If exalted, there will be something special and different between me and my spouse. But that will not preclude social, non-sexual relationships with my other friends. If I hinge my identity and celestial expectations on my hetero-normative attractions that I experience in mortality now, I think am going to be severely disappointed. The same goes for LGTB individuals. It will be about much, much more than attraction. The Celestial Kingdom: it's not about the sex.

Anyway, that's the thinking I had this morning. Probably has more holes than Swiss cheese. But, pointing those out is one of the things this board is good at. I shan't be offended.

 

* To be fair, I think the idea some early latter-day saints had on sexual relations (particularly polygamists) is also not on the mark.

Charity and what I call the Honeymoon Cottage version of the CK don't mix. We can't believe both and Mormons have thrown out charity to keep a honeymoon cottage. 

I think we will work in councils, just as Genesis lays out, not in couples. We are sealed as a heavenly family (Hebrews).  But I also think women hold the key to life and likely, resurrection. So I feel just as strongly that two men are not going to pair up in a honeymoon cottage and get any results without a woman.  Again....councils. 

Quote

1. While I believe there will be likely be sexual relationships in the eternities, it won't be entirely the same. Celestial beings will have full control of their body. Coitus won't be for the pleasure of the hormonal response we get in mortality (not that such is the only reason for it now). If our post-mortal happiness was contingent upon chemistry and we have full control of our bodies, we could just put ourselves in a state of blissful "high" all the time. Our happiness will transcend the state of our bodies internal chemistry. I won't be sexually attracted at any level to other women (or men). Any attraction chemistry will be a voluntary choice.

That was my first inkling about sex in heaven stuff. Why would we need a brief high? We are in heaven. Plus, God thinking about sex every 15 minutes like it is said men do is rather off putting. 

 

Quote

2. Love will transcend physical expression and it won't discriminate. Christ loves Ghandi or Mother Teresa just as much as Caiaphas or Hitler. As we approach exaltation, that love will be perfect for everyone. I'll love my spouse just as much as I'll love my elementary school bully. That's not to say there won't be friendships that are different. Christ called his disciples his friends. While I'm trying, I may not exactly be in the friend circle yet. I'll be friends with my spouse and others whom I love each equally as much. That can include men and non-spouse women.

I agree. Our theology is man made. Literally. It needs to also be woman made to get the hormones out of it. Council in Hebrew does take on a meaning of friendship/fellowship/intimacy as well as an assembly. So I think our intimacy there will be very different than our mortal experience based on hormones. 

It solves many problems. Polygamy, for one. JS's attempt at a heavenly assembly...his initial polyandry points to it.  Also, hormone based sexual attraction. It is replaced with something heavenly for everyone. The male/female union only becomes important because both are needed to create life but I think it will be about keys or whatever you want to call it that are inherent in each sex. 

Link to comment

I think this whole discussion on eternal families gets very creative.

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT8pJphTi7DNRzNAzSvObn-E3LtWh_nipWd3A&usqp=CAU

Link to comment

So the fiddly bits don’t make it past the grave?

Link to comment
3 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

I think this whole discussion on eternal families gets very creative.

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT8pJphTi7DNRzNAzSvObn-E3LtWh_nipWd3A&usqp=CAU

 

If one is at a zoo though, it could very well make perfect sense to think zebras, not horses. 
 

Context matters. 

Link to comment
1 hour ago, Calm said:

If one is at a zoo though, it could very well make perfect sense to think zebras, not horses. 
 

Context matters. 

True.  But when I hear eternal families and I read prophetic and scriptural references and I see the sealing of eternal families and the covenant into which children are born and sealed I find no need to come up with a wild creative idea how that works in eternities.

Father, Mother, child.  Period.  Even if the family has Mothers plural the structure of a child's parents is still the same.  No community, committee, or alternate same sex version.

Male/Female/offspring.  With or without resurrected sexual reproduction.

Link to comment
2 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

True.  But when I hear eternal families and I read prophetic and scriptural references and I see the sealing of eternal families and the covenant into which children are born and sealed I find no need to come up with a wild creative idea how that works in eternities.

Father, Mother, child.  Period.  Even if the family has Mothers plural the structure of a child's parents is still the same.  No community, committee, or alternate same sex version.

Male/Female/offspring.  With or without resurrected sexual reproduction.

But do you believe mortal parent child relationships will still matter or will our adult children whose spirits are possibly older than our own, who aren’t our spirit children but only physical…will they be viewed as our children eternally?  Will that be part of a hierarchical system or will hierarchy be seen as a mortal concept not needed in a family of gods?

Edited by Calm
Link to comment
21 minutes ago, Calm said:

But do you believe mortal parent child relationships will still matter or will our adult children whose spirits are possibly older than our own, who aren’t our spirit children but only physical…will they be viewed as our children eternally?  Will that be part of a hierarchical system or will hierarchy be seen as a mortal concept not needed in a family of gods?

I believe it will matter every bit as much as the relationship between the Savior and his father will matter.

Link to comment
8 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

I believe it will matter every bit as much as the relationship between the Savior and his father will matter.

But there is so much more going on in that relationship AND Christ was his spirit child as well as physical child. It might be in terms of their relationship hierarchy that his being Christ’s spirit father was all that matters…only in order to make Christ a candidate for the Atonement was he required to be his physical child as well. And we don’t have that function.

Link to comment
On 7/15/2021 at 10:37 AM, Nofear said:

1. While I believe there will be likely be sexual relationships in the eternities, it won't be entirely the same. Celestial beings will have full control of their body. Coitus won't be for the pleasure of the hormonal response we get in mortality (not that such is the only reason for it now). If our post-mortal happiness was contingent upon chemistry and we have full control of our bodies, we could just put ourselves in a state of blissful "high" all the time. Our happiness will transcend the state of our bodies internal chemistry. I won't be sexually attracted at any level to other women (or men). Any attraction chemistry will be a voluntary choice.

The happiest I have ever been in life was due to a drug-induced high. That scares me a little as I have had many euphoric spiritual experiences.

It is also difficult in this sense to say what this "happiness" you are talking about is. We haven't experienced it outside of chemistry. Is 'divine' happiness superior and different? I plan to put myself into a blissful "high" all the time anyways. Sure, there might be some different better expression of happiness, joy, pleasure, or whatever but every little bit helps.

Edit: I realized that I was unintentionally lying. The happiest I have ever been is in a recurring dream I thankfully do not have too often. In it I get everything I ever wanted. Waking up from it puts me in a very depressed state for at least days...often weeks.

Edited by The Nehor
Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...