Sexual Sin and the FAIR Instagram Video on Alma 39

[Calm]

1 hour ago, Teancum said:

Well I can guarantee you that there are married couples, within and without the church, who did not live together but may may have had premarital sex with others before marriage. In some cases multiple partners. And cases where one may have been sexually active and the other a virgin when married.  And even if both are virgins there can be significant differences in sexual compatibility.

 Such studies show probabilities, not absolutes.  The studies cannot prove the correlation is actually causation even.  So of course there will be examples that are atypical. 

Edited August 20, 2024 by Calm

[Teancum]

On 8/15/2024 at 4:34 PM, Calm said:

Looks like living together is still indicative of greater risk for divorce.  Exception exist if they are already engaged (they have already made the commitment rather than are trying to see if they are compatible (in most areas).

https://www.deseret.com/2023/5/1/23697802/living-together-cohabitation-before-marriage-linked-divorce/#:~:text=While living together makes it,divorcing if you did marry.
 

 

I am skeptical of the Deseret News presenting this in an unbiased way.

[Teancum]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

 Such studies show probabilities, not absolutes.  The studies cannot prove the correlation is actually causation even.  So of course there will be examples that are atypical. 

I think you missed my point entirely. You talked about if both of the couples are virgins they may be more successful in marriage due to lack of sexual comparison. And some how you tied that to living together before marriage.  My point is a couple might not live together before marriage but one or both may have been sexually active befoer marriage, with others and/or with each other. One may be a virgin one may have had multiple partners.  But they marry and did not live together before marriage and maybe they did not have sex with each other before marriage.  Sex happens a lot. And one need not live together to have sex.

[Calm]

36 minutes ago, Teancum said:

I think you missed my point entirely. You talked about if both of the couples are virgins they may be more successful in marriage due to lack of sexual comparison. And some how you tied that to living together before marriage.  My point is a couple might not live together before marriage but one or both may have been sexually active befoer marriage, with others and/or with each other. One may be a virgin one may have had multiple partners.  But they marry and did not live together before marriage and maybe they did not have sex with each other before marriage.  Sex happens a lot. And one need not live together to have sex.

Again, of course. But if both of a couple has a goal not to have sex before marriage and both manage to fulfill that desire, then I think there is often an advantage of less baggage (not always, someone might have unrealistic expectations; there is unfortunately too frequently porn involvement).

I guess I see your qualifications as so obvious there is no need to mention them. I grew up outside of Utah with almost all nonmember friends and almost all were sexually active by the time they were out of high school. My older friends/acquaintances who were more committed were likely living with their boyfriends. (I knew way too much about their love lives because they liked to teased the naive little Mormon girl, lol.) So I am thinking when I speak of those who choose not to live together beforehand of those who are typically already unusual and often choosing to have no premarital sex as well. 

Edited August 20, 2024 by Calm

[Calm]

57 minutes ago, Teancum said:

I am skeptical of the Deseret News presenting this in an unbiased way.

Feel free to dissect the study and to find other studies, I would be very interested in them. It is a subject I have always kept my eye on because it shocked me when I first found out eons ago (I was in high school and didn’t buy it at first, lol). 

I know the older stats have always shown this, but I actually thought before I went looking this time for some reason that the stats had changed in the last decade, but it appears the shift that occurred only involved couples who were already engaged (and they may not have had that category in the earlier studies to see if this is really a change, I can’t remember).  I didn’t deep dive this time, so there could be contradictory studies out there or the findings could have been pushed to suggest more than they do. 

Whether or not Deseretnews is using this to support church teachings, I have never used this as something that shows how the Church is true…or anything else where the science appears to be supportive of church teachings/standards as there are plenty of occasions the science hasn’t done so (benefits of green tea, for example).

I share such info because I think it’s important for people to make decisions based on good information.  I feel bad for those who make the decision to live together thinking it will help them stay married when they get married (for example, I know of one couple who thought it would be less pressure to ease into the experience of commitment, but the intent was to eventually commit to till death do we part).  I always in such discussions (haven’t had any for years since my friends and kids moved out of young adulthood) shared it is correlation so it may not have any long term effect, it may simply be a sign that those who are less certain and therefore less committed are choosing to live together first, so of course they will break up more than those who are certain who may simply be more likely to skip any preliminaries as a waste of time and get right to marinate. 

Edited August 20, 2024 by Calm

[Teancum]

13 hours ago, Calm said:

Feel free to dissect the study and to find other studies, I would be very interested in them. It is a subject I have always kept my eye on because it shocked me when I first found out eons ago (I was in high school and didn’t buy it at first, lol). 

I did a quick search and found that other studies confirm the Deseret News article you linked. So yes it appears those who live together before marriage have a higher rate of divorce.

[Maestrophil]

11 hours ago, Teancum said:

I did a quick search and found that other studies confirm the Deseret News article you linked. So yes it appears those who live together before marriage have a higher rate of divorce.

my anecdotal experience and observation are that marriage as a concept is weekend by premarital sex - it causes marriage to feel like just a tiny step above just dating - so it is much easier to take it less seriously and to be willing to 'break up'.  If you have invested your entire life in the prospect of marriage being eternal and the only place for sex, one can feel a lot more is at stake with divorce than just another breakup and 'move on'

[Bernard Gui]

On 8/19/2024 at 9:31 AM, teddyaware said:

He wasn’t saying modesty is dirty. Rather, he was saying immodesty (i.e. sexually provocative nudity before marriage) is considered dirty.

I'm not sure what dirty means. I understand what modesty is. Does dirty=immodesty in this context? I've never heard that term used by a Church leader when referring to immodesty.

Edited August 27, 2024 by Bernard Gui

[Frank11]

2 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

I'm not sure what dirty means. I understand what modest is. Does dirty=immodesty in this context? I've never heard that term used by a Church leader when referring to immodesty.

There is at least one historically relevant quote in which “dirty” was used.

“A dirty, nasty, filthy affair of his and Fanny Alger’s was talked over in which I strictly declared that I had never deserted from the truth in the matter, and as I supposed was admitted by himself.” (Oliver Cowdery regarding Joseph Smith and Fanny Alger.)

[Bernard Gui]

18 hours ago, Frank11 said:

There is at least one historically relevant quote in which “dirty” was used.

“A dirty, nasty, filthy affair of his and Fanny Alger’s was talked over in which I strictly declared that I had never deserted from the truth in the matter, and as I supposed was admitted by himself.” (Oliver Cowdery regarding Joseph Smith and Fanny Alger.)

Source please. CFR. I was talking about immodesty. 

[Frank11]

27 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

Source please. CFR. I was talking about immodesty. 

https://josephsmithspolygamy.org/common-questions/plural-marriages-sexual/fanny-alger-evidence-of-sexuality/

[Bernard Gui]

On 8/23/2024 at 4:54 PM, Frank11 said:

https://josephsmithspolygamy.org/common-questions/plural-marriages-sexual/fanny-alger-evidence-of-sexuality/

 Nope. Doesn’t refer to immodesty. Seems there's more background on Oliver's comments that needs explanation. 

Edited August 27, 2024 by Bernard Gui