I wonder if some people even know what it means to have a loving romantic relationship. I wonder if they know what it means to be intimate. I wonder if they understand what it means to feel deeply emotionally connected.
The thread on "spiritual infidelity" has me baffled... but then I start thinking of proponents of polygamy... and well, I just have to wonder.
It seems like some believers think marriage is just a requirement so you can get into the CKHL... or maybe just a partnership to fulfill the rules, or a contract that provides proof of obedience. They don't seem to have any emotion, love, compassion, or intimate connection with their spouse.
It is as if marriage is all about one getting into the CKHL so they can be a God... nothing more.
Is it just me or do ya'll get this same sort of impression by some posters?
~dancer~
Love, Marriage, Intimacy...
-
_truth dancer
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 4792
- Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 12:40 pm
-
_Yoda
Re: Love, Marriage, Intimacy...
truth dancer wrote:I wonder if some people even know what it means to have a loving romantic relationship. I wonder if they know what it means to be intimate. I wonder if they understand what it means to feel deeply emotionally connected.
The thread on "spiritual infidelity" has me baffled... but then I start thinking of proponents of polygamy... and well, I just have to wonder.
It seems like some believers think marriage is just a requirement so you can get into the CKHL... or maybe just a partnership to fulfill the rules, or a contract that provides proof of obedience. They don't seem to have any emotion, love, compassion, or intimate connection with their spouse.
It is as if marriage is all about one getting into the CKHL so they can be a God... nothing more.
Is it just me or do ya'll get this same sort of impression by some posters?
~dancer~
It's not just you. ;)
That's the primary reason I started posting here! LOL
-
_Bond...James Bond
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 4627
- Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 4:49 am
Re: Love, Marriage, Intimacy...
truth dancer wrote:I wonder if some people even know what it means to have a loving romantic relationship. I wonder if they know what it means to be intimate. I wonder if they understand what it means to feel deeply emotionally connected.
The thread on "spiritual infidelity" has me baffled... but then I start thinking of proponents of polygamy... and well, I just have to wonder.
It seems like some believers think marriage is just a requirement so you can get into the CKHL... or maybe just a partnership to fulfill the rules, or a contract that provides proof of obedience. They don't seem to have any emotion, love, compassion, or intimate connection with their spouse.
It is as if marriage is all about one getting into the CKHL so they can be a God... nothing more.
Is it just me or do ya'll get this same sort of impression by some posters?
~dancer~
(my emphasis)
Isn't it? Remember the speech at General Conference about dirty talk in the bedroom being a no-no?
The church doesn't know where to draw the line on what's intimate and what's not. They make you wear their underwear for Godssakes!!!
007
"Whatever appears to be against the Book of Mormon is going to be overturned at some time in the future. So we can be pretty open minded."-charity 3/7/07
-
_Runtu
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 16721
- Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 5:06 am
Re: Love, Marriage, Intimacy...
truth dancer wrote:I wonder if some people even know what it means to have a loving romantic relationship. I wonder if they know what it means to be intimate. I wonder if they understand what it means to feel deeply emotionally connected.
The thread on "spiritual infidelity" has me baffled... but then I start thinking of proponents of polygamy... and well, I just have to wonder.
It seems like some believers think marriage is just a requirement so you can get into the CKHL... or maybe just a partnership to fulfill the rules, or a contract that provides proof of obedience. They don't seem to have any emotion, love, compassion, or intimate connection with their spouse.
It is as if marriage is all about one getting into the CKHL so they can be a God... nothing more.
Is it just me or do ya'll get this same sort of impression by some posters?
~dancer~
It's the attitude that life is a series of hoops to be jumped through in preparation for the real life, which occurs only after death. It seems to me the real "infidelity" they're speaking of is to the always-present third member of an LDS marriage: the church.
-
_Yoda
It's the attitude that life is a series of hoops to be jumped through in preparation for the real life, which occurs only after death. It seems to me the real "infidelity" they're speaking of is to the always-present third member of an LDS marriage: the church.
Amen, Runtu!
I'll comment more later, guys....off to a meeting!
:)
-
_ajax18
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 6914
- Joined: Wed Oct 25, 2006 2:56 am
Matt. 10:35
For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.
36. And a man's foes shall be they of his own household.
37 He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.
I'm not saying that I know the last word on the subject, but I can certainly see where people get the idea you're talking about. Does that make any sense?
For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.
36. And a man's foes shall be they of his own household.
37 He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.
I'm not saying that I know the last word on the subject, but I can certainly see where people get the idea you're talking about. Does that make any sense?
And when the confederates saw Jackson standing fearless as a stone wall the army of Northern Virginia took courage and drove the federal army off their land.
-
_beastie
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 14216
- Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:26 am
If there are three people in a marriage - you, your spouse, and God... and God has to come first... maybe that, in and of itself, discourages deep emotional intimacy.
It seems to me that you have to be willing to take risks, reveal yourself, warts and all, in trust to your partner to have deep emotional and physical intimacy. If you're worried about pleasing God first, can you really do that? Maybe God won't like what you show to your spouse.
It seems to me that you have to be willing to take risks, reveal yourself, warts and all, in trust to your partner to have deep emotional and physical intimacy. If you're worried about pleasing God first, can you really do that? Maybe God won't like what you show to your spouse.
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.
Penn & Teller
http://www.mormonmesoamerica.com
Penn & Teller
http://www.mormonmesoamerica.com
-
_Ray A
Re: Love, Marriage, Intimacy...
truth dancer wrote:I wonder if some people even know what it means to have a loving romantic relationship. I wonder if they know what it means to be intimate. I wonder if they understand what it means to feel deeply emotionally connected.
Unfortunately I don't understand what it means to be deeply emotionally or romantically connected. I had a "church marriage", we got on great, seldom argued, married because we were both Mormons, and both served missions, raised five children in a happy home, but when we both lost our "TBM" beliefs the differences in our personalities became glaring. We were not soulmates or real lovers in the romantic sense, and she did eventually find her soulmate (I had no qualms with that at all, because at least she found true love, not "church based"). I'm a single father, and I can honestly say I've never been in true love with any woman (from what people have described to me anyway). Do I blame the church? Definitely not, it was my choice, and despite the problems, Mormonism gave me a lot which I don't regret. However, I would never, ever, have a "church marriage" again. I'm going for Moroni's record of being alone for 37 years :)
-
_truth dancer
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 4792
- Joined: Tue Oct 24, 2006 12:40 pm
Hi Ray... thanks for that insight.
I think your example is a good example of my concern.
I saw a few minutes of the end of The Stepford Wives last night (I haven't seen the movie), and the dialogue was something along the lines of what it takes to have a perfect marriage, to be a perfect wife, and to be a perfect husband. If everyone is perfect, everyone is happy.
I reflected on this thread because in a way it identified what may be an underlying issue.
It seems there is such a need for perfection, for appearance, for an image of the ideal that the honest, deep, intimacy that comes from sharing one's heart and soul is completely lost.
If being real is threatening and unacceptable a relationship is based on a role, a pretense, or even a representation of what one is.
If a relationship is nothing but a pretense, a contract, or a duty for some ultimate reward then it is easy to divorce someone for differing beliefs.
If one's alliance is with the church, not one's family or spouse then I guess the selfishness that comes from wanting the heavenly reward Trump's children and partner.
This also speaks to a discussion that has taken place a few times over the years.... how can the CKHL be heaven without one's loved ones? Well... I guess loved ones, children, partner don't much matter. It is all about the church and getting to the CKHL.
Ahhhhh no wonder the church didn't fit for me. :-(
~dancer~
I think your example is a good example of my concern.
I saw a few minutes of the end of The Stepford Wives last night (I haven't seen the movie), and the dialogue was something along the lines of what it takes to have a perfect marriage, to be a perfect wife, and to be a perfect husband. If everyone is perfect, everyone is happy.
I reflected on this thread because in a way it identified what may be an underlying issue.
It seems there is such a need for perfection, for appearance, for an image of the ideal that the honest, deep, intimacy that comes from sharing one's heart and soul is completely lost.
If being real is threatening and unacceptable a relationship is based on a role, a pretense, or even a representation of what one is.
If a relationship is nothing but a pretense, a contract, or a duty for some ultimate reward then it is easy to divorce someone for differing beliefs.
If one's alliance is with the church, not one's family or spouse then I guess the selfishness that comes from wanting the heavenly reward Trump's children and partner.
This also speaks to a discussion that has taken place a few times over the years.... how can the CKHL be heaven without one's loved ones? Well... I guess loved ones, children, partner don't much matter. It is all about the church and getting to the CKHL.
Ahhhhh no wonder the church didn't fit for me. :-(
~dancer~
-
_Yoda
Hi TD! :)
You bring up some great points. My husband and I nearly separated several years ago because I flat-out told him that I felt that the only reason he was in the relationship was for "keeping up appearances" sake for the benefit of the Church.
I won't go into detail, but we basically went through hell and back. Then, the girls went on a ski trip with my in-laws for a week. We were basically empty-nesters. LOL We had a chance to really talk. I think this helped us more than any type of therapy could have. We were honest with each other, and decided that we both needed to "grow up" and at least make a valid attempt to work things out for the kids, and for us.
Since then, we had an unexpected addition to the family....our now 2 year old son (being 40, having teen-aged daughters and a toddler is a crazy household...LOL).
We're still active in Church, but it doesn't dictate our lives. We were able to find a balance that works for us.
I think that balance is the key.
You bring up some great points. My husband and I nearly separated several years ago because I flat-out told him that I felt that the only reason he was in the relationship was for "keeping up appearances" sake for the benefit of the Church.
I won't go into detail, but we basically went through hell and back. Then, the girls went on a ski trip with my in-laws for a week. We were basically empty-nesters. LOL We had a chance to really talk. I think this helped us more than any type of therapy could have. We were honest with each other, and decided that we both needed to "grow up" and at least make a valid attempt to work things out for the kids, and for us.
Since then, we had an unexpected addition to the family....our now 2 year old son (being 40, having teen-aged daughters and a toddler is a crazy household...LOL).
We're still active in Church, but it doesn't dictate our lives. We were able to find a balance that works for us.
I think that balance is the key.