- Chad Nielsen on A Review: Welding Another Link: Latter-day Saint Essays on Faith and Intellect: “Yeah. It’s fun to see his name pop up so much, especially this year, with his book with Oxford coming out as well.” Apr 7, 11:22
- on How Many Latter-day Saints View Pornography?: “Upon reflection on this thread, I have edited my Q&As… Does the church counsel its members to avoid pornography? Yes (well, yes in the recent past but not as much lately). Is viewing pornography a sin? Maybe, maybe even probably (especially considering the Lord’s instruction in Matthew 5:28), but inasmuch as the current handbook states that viewing pornography is not a basis for church discipline, I suppose it is not a major sin in comparison with some other sins. The church does not equate viewing pornography with actually committing adultery. Our scripture is silent on the matter, and God has never provided a complete list of all possible sins especially for private matters — indeed, God’s concept of sin may differ from the church’s concept (and the church’s concept may change with time), and the church’s concept may differ from an individual member’s concept (which also may change with time). For a great many some matters, especially small matters, the same identical action might be a sin for one person in a particular circumstance and might not be a sin for a different person or a different circumstance. Can one who views pornography hold a temple recommend? Yes, at least since the change in questions in 2019; provided, the applicant can affirm that he or she is striving for moral cleanliness. Viewing pornography might be unclean and/or unchaste, but is not a violation of the church’s Law of Chastity. I appreciate the discussion.” Apr 7, 10:58
- on A Review: Welding Another Link: Latter-day Saint Essays on Faith and Intellect: “Thanks for the review, and congratulations to Nate, one of many T&S emeriti who went on to bigger and better things after graduating from blogging.” Apr 7, 10:55
- on How Many Latter-day Saints View Pornography?: “I suspect it’s things like this letter that prompted the Church to tighten up what counts as an official Church position and be more transparent about those positions–in particular by making the Handbook public. We could quibble about what exactly is official, but “Something my institute teacher said was in a letter 40 years ago” clearly is not. Want to know the Church’s actual position on pornography or birth control? Read section 38.6 in the Handbook, “Policies on Moral Issues.” (All members really should be familiar with 38.6.) Want to know if fornication will lead to a membership council? Read chapter 32 in the Handbook. Want to know the Church’s position on oral sex? Read 38.6 and note that it’s not there. Check the scriptures, the Family Proclamation, For the Strength of Youth (unlikely), recent general conference talks, the Church website, and anything else you might consider authoritative; note that it’s not there either. Conclude that the Church has no position on oral sex. Because if it did, it would put it somewhere that we’re encouraged to read. It’s not entirely cut and dried–the status of old conference talks is pretty ambiguous, for example. But it’s not nearly as opaque as you’d think from the discussion here.” Apr 7, 08:58
- on How Many Latter-day Saints View Pornography?: “People have a way of remembering the past to suit the needs of whatever argument they’re engaged in online. I don’t know precisely what age this anonymous is intending to depict, but the target seems to be a bit younger than my own. And yet I never heard of the letters he claims were famous despite all my BYU religion classes, or the strict and precise teachings supposedly coming from the top. You could fill prescriptions for birth control pills on campus at BYU by the mid-90s at the latest, and likely earlier. Birth control is also an entirely separate issue, and has no bearing on this discussion. I haven’t met anyone whose life was ruined through use of birth control. I could point out several lives ruined by pornography. It has as much place in marriage as huffing glue has in your weekly meal planning.” Apr 6, 20:00
- on How Many Latter-day Saints View Pornography?: “JI, that’s an atrocious attempt at a summary. The position of the Church remains: “The Church condemns pornography in any form. Pornography use of any kind damages individual lives, families, and society. It also drives away the Spirit of the Lord. Church members should avoid all forms of pornographic material and oppose its production, dissemination, and use.” You’re collapsing the vast distance between “doesn’t need to face a formal disciplinary council” and “worthy to enter the temple.” Scripture is absolutely not silent on this; please review the Sermon on the Mount if you are unfamiliar with it.” Apr 6, 19:41
- on How Many Latter-day Saints View Pornography?: “I think some talking at cross-purposes is occurring here. Maybe I can craft a few Q&As on which there might be universal agreement… Does the church counsel its members to avoid pornography? Yes (well, yes in the recent past but not as much lately). Is viewing pornography a sin? Maybe, maybe even probably, but inasmuch as the current handbook states that viewing pornography is not a basis for church discipline, I suppose it is not a major sin. Our scripture is silent on the matter, and God has never provided a complete list of all possible sins especially for private matter — indeed, God’s concept of sin may differ from the church’s concept (and the church’s concept may change with time), and the church’s concept may differ from an individual member’s concept (which also may change with time). For a great many matters, especially small matters, the same identical action might be a sin for one person in a particular circumstance and might not be a sin for a different person or a different circumstance. Can one who views pornography hold a temple recommend? Yes, at least since the change in questions in 2019; provided, the applicant can affirm that he or she is striving for moral cleanliness. Viewing pornography might be unclean and/or unchaste, but is not a violation of the church’s Law of Chastity.” Apr 6, 18:13
- on How Many Latter-day Saints View Pornography?: “Yikes! You guys are rough here. But that’s OK, it’s your space. About that oral sex letter—you may be right that it was but one letter. It had a long afterlife however. I heard Randy Bott teach it at BYU with my own ears, and before that may home bishop do the same. It wasn’t unknown, not in the slightest. Literally thousands of Bott’s students must have heard it taught for probably 20-30 years. And I believed him and trusted him. Why wouldn’t I back then? My spouse, they got the same teaching at Rics multiple times in multiple religious education courses. They believed it too, as did thousands of others through the 80s and 90s and beyond. So don’t act like it was a fringe thing. We both entered marriage with the baseline understanding that it was absolutely a sin for married couples. YMMV. I notice that Jonathan didn’t respond to my question about why he presumably has ignored the generations long teachings against using birth control. He dismissed it as whataboutism. That’s a dodge. My guess is that he and his wife decided to ignore or adapt those very, very strict and precise teachings that came straight from the very highest authorities. And I also guess that he and his wife have taught their children to do the same. Creating life and bringing children into existence is like a million times more impactful a moral decision than pornography use in a marriage. So why ignore the teachings about the one and be so absolutist about the other? As for marital pornography use, I think you overestimate or are engaging in some lurid imagination about what that might look like in a long term marriage. We are not young! We can barely stay awake past 9:30, and neither of us has any extra energy for anything crazy. Someone mentioned swinging! LOL. Ew, just no. Erotic material in our marriage is more like an aid, or accelerant, or helpful shortcut when that is beneficial. And, Jonathan, you do realize that most people have very basic desires and have the opposite of the kind of reactions to exploitative stuff you seem to imagine comprises all pornographic or erotic material? Your response seriously gives me the creeps.” Apr 6, 18:01
- on How Many Latter-day Saints View Pornography?: “If Brother Anonymous and his spouse were swingers to keep the marriage going then the stones being thrown here may be more justified. Porn in a marriage may not be the gospel plan, or any marital plan, but if it is not keeping them from the temple then I think his view on how it works for them is warranted. He is clearly not suggesting that everyone should live this way. To Last Lemmings point, in the past there were lots of official policies that were only privy/sent to Bishops and up. Not sure if that is still a thing or not. Some of these letters sat around for years leaving leaders to wonder if they were still a thing. A couple that come to mind is the “no children bearing testimonies in sacrament, not asking members to turn to scriptures during there talks in church, not using props of any kind during your talks in church. (these were all read over the pulpit but it makes my point) Are they all still valid? If coffee/booze keeps you out of the temple but porn doesn’t……hmmm…. I am not saying porn is NOT a sin but just saying that it may not be a serious sin in the churches view, anymore. I am saying coffee/booze/smokes is not a sin and should have never become such IMO. Anyone eat meat this last summer and still got a temple rec?? I have a stone to throw at you! ;) Any current YSA bishops or SP in here? I have heard there are no councils (or whatever they are called now) for YSA’s who fornicate. Maybe for habitual fornicators there is?” Apr 6, 16:12
- on How Many Latter-day Saints View Pornography?: “If your response to extremely clear teachings and scripture about pornography is whataboutism, then your capacity for moral calculus is badly impaired and I wouldn’t rely too heavily on it. This isn’t the odd cup of coffee we’re talking about here, but pornography. An industry that exploits the most basic human instinct, selling a promise of unlimited sexual pleasure without negative consequence and sexual congress severed from human and eternal relationship. You can’t consume it without letting it rewire neural pathways that affect how you see and relate to everyone you know. I don’t care about your failings and imperfections; there’s a whole plan for that. But promoting marital pornography use as some kind of solution? That’s a load of cr*p, and it’s a giant red flag that you can’t see it.” Apr 6, 15:03
