I don’t know if Alma was more concerned for the group or for the potential and new converts that had not heard about the gospel. My concern with the above situations would not be that the church looks bad – most people can notice when one is not living up to set standards. I would say for those that know about the church, the situation is more an irony than problematic. For thsoe that do not know anything about the church this may turn them off to the gospel.

To use the opening story – the woman complains that the man hitting on her is a married Mormon. One of the group she tells is considering religion and looking for something that is missing in life. This individual has never heard of the Mormon church or met a Mormon, but the missionaries – hypothetically, were set to tract on this persons street later that week. Upon hearing this experience, suddenly the Mormons are no different than anybody else and the potential of finding the missing something dissipates and when the missionaries arive, the interest is not there.

It reminds me of a roommate I had here in Provo. Great guy, but he slept around a lot and had a very negative view of marriage. Why was his view of marriage so negative? Because he saw so many women who were unfaithful (often with him). Why did he see so many unfaithful women though? Well, those tended to be the kind of women he dated. It was a kind of self-sufficient prophecy because of the kind of people he associated with. There were, of course, lots of faithful good women here in Provo. Indeed I think them the majority. But somehow the women he’d flirt with at banks and so forth were also the sort not exactly inclined to traditional Mormon views of dating. Needless to say that biased the kind of views they held to fidelity.

In the same way, I suspect I have an overly rosy view of Mormons because those tend to be the kind of people I associate with. Yes, I’ve known lots of other people, both from friends and roommates. So I’ve known crazy people, drug addicts, and lots of other people. Probably a broad cross section. But even though I recall passing the sacrament in many singles wards with less than 1/3 taking the sacrament, I still believe that by and large most active Mormons are good people who try to do the right thing.

My original point does, perhaps, need a little modification. I guess I should say I don’t think compliance with church standards should be entirely based on personal or collective motivations. I do believe, though, that certain motivations seem to naturally suit some people more than others. So, in short, it would be awesome if, in our church, those who are concerned with the group image could recognize that individual salvation is the ultimate goal; at the same time, it would also be good if the individuals could realize to a higher degree that their actions do have consequences for people other than themselves. In the immortal words of Rodney King, “Can’t we all just get along?”

David makes some good points to APJ, too.

Brother Gordon’s and Brother Aaron’s stories of women encountering adulterous Mormon men don’t bother me much, though. A woman who “always attract[s] married men” will sift out adulterous Mormons. We would prefer that there were no such thing, but where there is one, that woman will meet him.

APJ: I think it is unhealthy to expect people to make decisions based on how it will make the group look.

I don’t believe that it is fair to characterize this as an appearance issue. It’s not just about how Mormon’s look; it goes much deeper. I think that one of Gordon’s main points here is that when we break covenants, it has much deeper ramifications than simply whether we as individuals remain worthy members. Like Alma’s son Corianton, it can fundamentally impact the way that people view the mission of our church and our message to the world.

APJ: In my personal experience, when I do try to make decisions on that basis, my resolve doesn’t last too long.

This may be a symptom of the personal recklessness that individuals feel entitled to in modern society.

Kaimi: That reminds me of a time when I was having the obligatory, uncomfortable sex talk with my Dad, and he began some cationary sentence along the lines of, “there are girls who will want to do things with you sexually…”

At which point I said, “yes, Dad, but where are these girls?”

I also remember well such warnings, and I also remember hoping to find one of the chicks my dad was warning me about. This is one of the things that baffles me about polygamy; viz., the math just doesn’t seem to wark: There are always more willing guys than there are willing chicks. (I, for one, am darned lucky to be married; I can’t say the same for my wife.)

I understand that our sole motivation shouldn’t be “the group”, but I’m not so sure it shouldn’t be a part of it.

Hmm. I am puzzling over this because I largely agree with it. But is it because there is something inherently bad about appeals to the community? Or are we just selfish? My inclination is to favor the latter explanation. I am reminded of the verse in D&C 128:15 (paraphrasing Heb 11:40): “that they without us cannot be made perfect—neither can we without our dead be made perfect.” It is not exactly on point, but suggest that we have obligations to others and should be motivated by them.

at which point I said,

“yes, Dad, but _where_ are these girls?”

:P