Friday, December 9, 2011

A Bloggernacle Rant

And I also cast my eyes round about, and beheld, on the other side of the river of water, a great and spacious building... And it was filled with people ... and they were in the attitude of mocking and pointing their fingers towards those who had come at and were partaking of the fruit.
1 Nephi 8:26-27
I suppose I should start out by saying that for the most part, the Bloggernacle has been a positive force in my life. However, what follows is a rant about the one thing that really upsets me about a general attitude among some Bloggernacle participants.

Many Bloggernacle participants (myself included) experience tension with the prevailing culture of the church. Several participants (myself not included) either do not believe the theological claims of the church or do not participate in the church. So far, so good.

My issue comes when some of those who don't believe in or participate in the church act superior to those who do - as if they're more "enlightened" than those of us who do. The biggest example that comes to mind is regarding the law of chastity. (For my non-LDS readers, the law of chastity is the commandment to abstain from premarital sex and to be completely faithful to one's spouse.)

There doesn't seem to be much disagreement on the subject of adultery. We all appear to be in agreement that a person shouldn't cheat on his/her spouse. The disagreement comes on the subject of premarital sex.

It's certainly fair game to discuss what Alma was really saying to Corianton on the subject. It's fair game to discuss how serious a sin premarital sex is (or if it's even really a sin). It's fair game to discuss whether the church teaches the subject in a constructive manner, and whether there are any unintended consequences of those teachings. But what isn't fair game is to belittle those people who, despite its difficulty, are true and faithful to their temple covenants.

There are numerous posts where commenters have mentioned that it's stupid to avoid premarital sex. Others have said it's impossible. Others have said that people who obey the law of chastity are repressed. I was listening to an old podcast yesterday that basically said that no unmarried member of the church over a certain age is really keeping the law of chastity.

Well, I'm sick of it. I'm not stupid, I'm not repressed, and I do exist. I made a solemn promise to God in the temple and I have kept and intend to continue keeping that promise. There are other Bloggernacle participants in the same boat. So, seriously, get out of the great and spacious building and leave us alone!

1 comment:

Jessica said...

…People often misunderstand what psychology teaches about “repressions.” It teaches us that “repressed” sex is dangerous. But “repressed” is here a technical term: it does not mean “suppressed” in the sense of “denied” or “resisted.” A repressed desire or thought is one which has been thrust into the subconscious (usually at a very early age) and can now come before the mind only in a disguised and unrecognisable form. Repressed sexuality does not appear to the patient to be sexuality at all. When an adolescent or an adult is engaged in resisting a conscious desire, he is not dealing with a repression nor is he in the least danger of creating a repression. On the contrary, those who are seriously attempting chastity are more conscious, and soon know a great deal more about their own sexuality than anyone else. They come to know their desires as Wellington knew Napoleon, or as Sherlock Holmes knew Moriarty; as a rat-catcher knows rats or a plumber knows about leaky pipes. Virtue — even attempted virtue — brings light; indulgence brings fog.

C.S. Lewis
Book 3 Chapter 5, “Sexual Morality”