maklelan wrote:I'm not aware of any GA ever telling anyone that sexual desire was ever dirty or sinful. Would you mind documenting this, please?
I'm with you here, mak, although I think some GAs believe(d) it was sort of a "necessary evil," as it were. I've always thought this quote from Packer was illustrative:
As you move into your teens, almost of a sudden a boy or a girl becomes something new and intensely interesting. You will notice the changing of form and feature in your own body and in others. You will experience the early whispering of physical desire.
It was necessary that this power of creation have at least two dimensions: one, it must be strong; and two, it must be more or less constant.
This power must be strong, for most men by nature seek adventure. Except for the compelling persuasion of these feelings, men would be reluctant to accept the responsibility of sustaining a home and a family.
Granted, this quote is from 1972, but I doubt Packer's views have changed much since then. But the idea that the sex drive is the compelling reason men stay with their families is just weird. In the same article, he talks about when the sex drive in animals is fleeting, animals don't have the same kind of family life that humans do. So, really, at best, it seems, the sex drive is an animal urge that God helpfully made constant so that we'd want to stay with our families.
But I do like this quote from an old Relief Society manual:
“Youth need to understand how to interpret these [normal feelings according to their divine purpose]. Young people can counteract worldly attitudes with this attitude: ‘This power of procreation is a spark of divinity within me. It is not part of my life now, but will be later. There is a proper time (marriage) for this spark of divinity to find expression with a proper person (my wife or husband).
I like the idea of sex as exercising the spark of divinity. Works for me.
I rarely find statistics that exciting, but I'm curious what the breakdown is of LDS/Non LDS, Active/Not Active, and stuff like that. In addition, I'm not aware of any doctrine that states that LDS folk will not be subject to affliction or temptation. If I recall correctly, it's quite the opposite. I've never (as far as I can recall) pointed to any kind of state or national statistic as a sign of anything, but for those that would like to draw conclusions from this, perhaps some more information would be helpful.
I've never though Utah's statistics were particularly exciting, either, in that I don't believe they tell us much about the church's effect on people. And you're right that, at least doctrinally, one would expect that affliction and temptation would come at least equally to Mormons. I just think it's funny that people tout statistics that they think make the church look good and discount those that put it in a less-favorable light. Human nature, I suppose.