another argument for gay marriage

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Levin

Archaea and Tex, this has been a very nice exchange, and you have both represented your sides well.


The idea of "joy" being the purpose of life is fairly modern concept -- at least in the Christian world. For centuries, "joy" was to bear the cross -- joy was to suffer for Christ. Indulgence of fleshly passions was pleasurable, but antithetical to joy.

Lehi's statement is a challenge to a long line of western Christian thought, depending on how it's interpreted.

There are several vexing questions for those who adhere to the hard line that breaking the commandments inexorably leads to unhappiness:

(1) the mother who is miserable b/c she stays at home v. the mother who is joyful b/c she works

(2) the 40-year old virgin who is tormented by his sexual urges v. the 40-year old who has sex in a loving, committed relationship outside the bonds of marriage

(3) the homosexual man who is tormented by his sexual urges v. the homosexual man who has gay sex in a loving, committed relationship

It's not so simple to break it down into an either or, but in order to find any sense in the "joy = righteousness" and "misery = sin" pairings, you have to define joy to equal "the joy that comes from obedience; joy is to suffer for Christ." How else to account for the Savior's startling comment to the Nephites that it is better to bear one's cross (said in the context of a sermon on sexual sin) than to be thrust down to hell.

Actually, I could argue the concept of life being about joy was around at least as early Adam.

You're playing semantic games with the word "joy." As I'm sure you know, the consequences of sin are not always swift and severe. But they are there; it is eternal law. You cannot play in the mud and not get dirty, no matter how much fun it seems to do it.

The kind of joy I'm referring to is everlasting joy of the kind associated with eternal life. That is not to be found in the examples you describe.

Originally Posted by Levin

One other requirement for these pairings to work: you have to believe! If the 40-year old virgin believes, then breaking the law of chastity -- while giving a moment of indescribably intense pleasure -- will cause heartbreaking spiritual pain (at least the first few times he does it until he gets "past feeling"). But for those who don't believe, sex outside the bonds of marriage can be a source of intense pleasure and intense joy.

The laws of God don't change based on the faith (or lack thereof) of the individual who breaks them.

[Levin]

Originally Posted by Tex

The kind of joy I'm referring to is everlasting joy of the kind associated with eternal life. That is not to be found in the examples you describe.

You just switched the game. Now you're talking about joy in the next life. Up until now, the subject was joy in this life. Nobody can argue with the everlasting joy in the next life b/c we haven't experienced that, can't prove it exists, etc. But we can talk about how we feel here. How about talking about that?

Originally Posted by Tex

The laws of God don't change based on the faith (or lack thereof) of the individual who breaks them.

Where does the person who does not believe, but who is in a committed, kind, selfless, loving relationship outside the bods of marriage suffer the consequences in this life in terms of decreased joy for breaking the law of chastity? And remember, we're talking about mortality, not the afterlife.

And we're talking from the POV of the person; where does the non-believer who has sex with integrity (respects his partners; is faithful to them until they break up; loves them; etc.) feel the wrath of the law of chastity?