Stuggling with addictions in the Church

[Anonymous]

doug wrote:

DevilsAdvocate wrote:

The big picture here is what concerns me more than my own personal problems and I just don’t think the Church is really helping the situation by exaggerating and reinforcing some of these unrealistic attitudes about porn. That’s one reason I don’t want to ignore this issue because it’s just not going away and I want to at least try to spread the message that this “P addiction” myth is mostly BS in the hopes that maybe a few people will start to think about it enough to see through some of the ignorance and hype about it before it is too late in their case.

I humbly suggest you find another windmill to tilt at. Maybe that’s because I have bought into things like a link between P and serial murder (a la Ted Bundy) and it just seems like there is so much other low-hanging fruit ripe for the tilting at (sorry about the metaphor mixing) that wouldn’t result in you being classed with Larry Flynt. Or maybe you’re right, and I’m just a big chicken.

If people want to think I’m a sick pervert or potential serial killer just because I like boobs then that’s their problem. As far as I’m concerned, God made me this way and it looks like I’m not the only one because porn is becoming more popular than ever and it can’t be stopped no matter how much people try to demonize it. I’ve already said pretty much everything I wanted to say about porn on another thread specifically about that a few months ago.

The main point I wanted to make here is simply that I don’t believe that most people that basically don’t want to stop looking at porn are “addicts.” Real addicts typically have a hard time stopping even if they want to or they seriously try to stop and fail and real addictions typically have negative effects on peoples’ health and/or everyday lives. For porn, the only negative consequence I see in most cases is wives not liking it which could be reason enough to avoid it in some cases but that doesn’t mean this reason will apply to everyone as a general rule.

[Anonymous]

I can see where you are coming from. But I don’t agree with the Twilight book reference. I think porn is different in that you are seeking out something specifically for arousal, it’s not a somewhat innocent side effect. In that regard, I think it is more like drugs. You are seeking something for the sole reason of triggering the pleasure center of your brain, and that can definitely become addictive. On some controllable level, you are right that it isn’t going to be a big societal problem. Perusing through the latest issue of Playboy isn’t going to turn anyone into a sex offender. But just like drugs, for every few that can keep it at that level, there is someone crossing the line into ruin. I’m not trying to act like I am perfect here, I’m not innocent in this regard. But I think the church is right in taking a stance on this, because it has the potential to get out of hand and ruin families along the same lines as other addictions.

[Anonymous]

DevilsAdvocate wrote:

The main point I wanted to make here is simply that I don’t believe that most people that basically don’t want to stop looking at porn are “addicts.” Real addicts typically have a hard time stopping even if they want to or they seriously try to stop and fail and real addictions typically have negative effects on peoples’ health and/or everyday lives. For porn, the only negative consequence I see in most cases is wives not liking it which could be reason enough to avoid it in some cases but that doesn’t mean this reason will apply to everyone as a general rule.

Well, I think I agree, and I’d be pleased if the church would back off. Though it wouldn’t be happening in my family any time soon, I’m sure there is a place for porn in many healthy relationships. I was reminded of a movie I watched the other day (Amazing Grace … good movie) about a British MP trying to eradicate the slave trade. He (according to the movie) was making headway until war with the French broke out (again) and all of a sudden being anti-slave trade became equated with being unpatriotic, in spite of the fact that fundamentally the two were all but completely unrelated and that it made no sense to link the two. That seems to be the way things really work in the real world, and we have been so spun up about this topic that rational discussion or debate is all but impossible right now. You could easily die on your sword.

Also agree that an unwilling spouse (i.e. wife in the vast majority of cases, I assume) is the trump card. I’m not asking for an informal poll, but is the conventional wisdom that this is primarily a male thing really true?

[Anonymous]

Quote:

observant wrote… I agree that porn is being over-hyped.

My vote goes for “over-hyped” also. I don’t see the big deal.

Quote:

I thought DAs Twilight reference was pretty funny.

+1

Quote:

I don’t know any man who would be upset about their wife getting turned on

Not a problem for me!

Quote:

So if the roles were reversed would men be upset at their wives viewing porn? Probably not!

As long as the kids didn’t catch us. 😳

f4h1

[Anonymous]

I must make it clear guys, I’m not a porn fan. I think it is unhealthy in most relationships. Even if that is because of misunderstandings of the partners.

[Anonymous]

Brown wrote:

I can see where you are coming from. But I don’t agree with the Twilight book reference. I think porn is different in that you are seeking out something specifically for arousal, it’s not a somewhat innocent side effect. In that regard, I think it is more like drugs. You are seeking something for the sole reason of triggering the pleasure center of your brain, and that can definitely become addictive. On some controllable level, you are right that it isn’t going to be a big societal problem. Perusing through the latest issue of Playboy isn’t going to turn anyone into a sex offender. But just like drugs, for every few that can keep it at that level, there is someone crossing the line into ruin. I’m not trying to act like I am perfect here, I’m not innocent in this regard. But I think the church is right in taking a stance on this, because it has the potential to get out of hand and ruin families along the same lines as other addictions.

The main reason I mentioned Twilight is mostly because my wife actually does read these books. I know they are probably fairly mild but there are also some romance novels that really are sleazy and I know for a fact that some women do read them specifically seeking arousal. So why don’t we ever hear about how terrible romance novels are and that all women need to be permanently cured of romance novel “addiction”? Mostly because men don’t really care about it, that’s why. But because some women have been freaking out about porn we need to make it into this huge issue and act like it is the absolute worst thing in the world which will not really prevent it in many cases, all it will really do is make some men hide it and make women even more upset if they find out about it and it becomes an endless cycle. That’s why I think the Church should calm down about this issue because they are not going to win this battle over the long run and when their hard-line zero tolerance policy fails it will generally only make things worse for everyone involved.

[Anonymous]

Fair points. I definitely agree on the zero tolerance policies. So I get drunk a couple times a year on special occasions, does that make me an alcoholic? Same logic would apply to other things as well.

And honestly, judging from the lines outside the stores when the latest “must have” video game or book is released, there are certainly some unhealthy relationships with things other than drugs and porn.

Just to take this further off course, what about the church’s position that things like porn, alcohol and drugs deaden the spirit. Can you look at porn and be spritually uplifted in the same day? Can you if you are drunk? Is that any reason to completely abstain?

[Anonymous]

Brown wrote:

Fair points. I definitely agree on the zero tolerance policies. So I get drunk a couple times a year on special occasions, does that make me an alcoholic? Same logic would apply to other things as well…Just to take this further off course, what about the church’s position that things like porn, alcohol and drugs deaden the spirit. Can you look at porn and be spritually uplifted in the same day? Can you if you are drunk? Is that any reason to completely abstain?

Personally, I think this idea of losing the spirit is mostly just the Church manipulating peoples’ emotions. I used to feel very guilty about a lot of things the Church harps on and no matter how hard I tried to focus on doing one thing right there were always several more things I was still supposed to do better. But after I basically gave up on the idea of making it to the Celestial Kingdom anyway most of the guilt went away and I started to feel better most of the time and didn’t notice much of a difference anymore between when I had supposedly sinned or not. Then when I tried to go back to Church and started to look at some of the real details of the origin and evolution of some of these doctrines it made me even more confident that there wasn’t really any good reason to feel too guilty about not living up to most of these strict standards.

Whenever I drink too much I start to feel bad like I shouldn’t have done that mostly because of the physical effects but after I sleep it off I don’t really feel any worse about myself the next day. After I look at porn I basically forget about it almost immediately and can still feel what I would have called the spirit during my most obedient TBM days. That’s why I think this unrealistic level of abstinence is BS in most cases and it sounds more like pointless monk-like deprivation to me. I do think abstinence is probably a good idea for things that really are addictive and unhealthy more often than not like cigarettes and hard drugs. Other than that, the only time I would recommend this kind of strict abstinence for anyone that isn’t living with TBMs that will freak out if they break these rules would be for people that really don’t know when to stop with some of these things but it seems like they are often a minority anyway.

[Anonymous]

Brown wrote:

Can you look at porn and be spritually uplifted in the same day? Can you if you are drunk? Is that any reason to completely abstain?

I think these are excellent questions…because it seems we discuss on this board a lot that abstinence seems extreme, moderation would be better, and that a stigma gets created in the church with anything less than abstinence when most of us don’t feel it is that big of a deal to us. But when I go back and read wmgoethe’s message on page 1, I feel for him. I don’t think he is saying it is some small thing in his life. He needs help, whether that is professional help on other things in his life, or just needing to relax to not worry so much about things the church makes us fear unnecessarily, or going to a 12 step program to abstain and eradicate it from his life…he needs something to help him.

There are lots of people going to bishops and the church asking for help on some vices that plaque their lives (addictons). I wonder if that is not exactly what happened with alcohol until the church finally made it an official commandment to abstain which became today’s interpretation of the WoW, and then they threw in coffee and tea because it was also part of the original intent of D&C 89, even if the revelation originally was by way of word of wisdom not by way of commandment. That seems like a logical possible progression to me. To many people, it may not have been a big issue, but it was brought up to local leaders constantly (high councils were dealing with it often) and it was being handled differently in different areas of the church, so the church produced a standard policy to go by to make it easier on leaders to run the church. Maybe we think it was an over reaction based on social issues of the day, like prohibition…maybe we think it misses the mark for our lives today, but it was not done out of random thoughts the prophet just decided one day he had nothing to do so he thought he’d make up a new commandment.

With porn, it may not be a problem for some (men or women), and some don’t understand all the hub-ub, but it seems to have become big enough problems for enough people that it is mentioned every GC and bishops spend a lot of time on the subject. Perhaps we think they should handle it differently and not make people feel so guilty about it. But it appears that their approach has been that it is better for everyone to just abstain from it…it is safest for all that way, and if it is something that drives out the spirit in our lives, then we should try to do without it. That is how I interpret their messages, and so I balance it with my own needs, reasoning and experience, and I try to sympathize with others best I can.

I personally feel it is a bedroom issue. Consenting adults can decide what they want to do there, and the church should stay out of that realm. Youth need guidance in those areas, and if parents can’t provide that, then the church should warn youth of dangers of getting into mature adult situations prematurely and what the dangers can be for developing healthy relationships.

[Anonymous]

As always is the end result in these discussions, DA, it simply boils down to people viewing things differently.

[Anonymous]

Heber13 wrote:

…it seems we discuss on this board a lot that abstinence seems extreme, moderation would be better, and that a stigma gets created in the church with anything less than abstinence when most of us don’t feel it is that big of a deal to us…There are lots of people going to bishops and the church asking for help on some vices that plaque their lives (addictons). I wonder if that is not exactly what happened with alcohol until the church finally made it an official commandment to abstain…

With porn, it may not be a problem for some (men or women), and some don’t understand all the hub-ub, but it seems to have become big enough problems for enough people that it is mentioned every GC and bishops spend a lot of time on the subject…it appears that their approach has been that it is better for everyone to just abstain from it…it is safest for all that way…I personally feel it is a bedroom issue. Consenting adults can decide what they want to do there, and the church should stay out of that realm.

Old-Timer wrote:

As always is the end result in these discussions, DA, it simply boils down to people viewing things differently.

I understand that many active members have had an easier time with most of these rules than I have so far and if these strict standards work alright in their case then good for them. I guess my question is what happens when this rigid approach doesn’t work for what looks like an increasing number of members? The problem is that rather than failing gracefully in many cases these strict standards will often lead to unnecessary disappointment and really wreak havoc in some of the worst cases. For example, we end up with many members that feel like they have basically failed as parents simply because some of their children had sex before they were married and/or started drinking and ended up “falling away” from the Church.

Even worse is the case of members that try so hard to go along with the program (missions, tithing, WoW, temple marriage, callings, etc.) half their lives only to stumble onto some anti-Mormon propaganda and be left feeling like victims because of all the time, money, and effort they have already invested in the Church. Show me a bitter ex-Mormon atheist married to a stubborn TBM and I’ll show you a likely divorce waiting to happen in large part because of all these unrealistic expectations about what exactly is acceptable behavior or at least behavior we can live with even if not quite ideal.

[Anonymous]

Quote:

Show me a bitter ex-Mormon atheist married to a stubborn TBM and I’ll show you a likely divorce waiting to happen

True of any religion – and sports fanatics – and a hardcore Democrat married to a hardcore Republican – or a mixed race couple in a racist extended family – ad infinitum. Extreme differences cause extreme tensions – and working out those tensions ALWAYS includes one person sacrificing for the other OR both sacrificing for each other. If neither of those can happen, divorce is waiting to happen.

I don’t mean to minimize the impact or seriousness of what you are saying, DA – but, at the most fundamental level, the quote above is a, “Duh! and?” situation. Of course that’s a divorce waiting to happen – but it’s not the “fault” of the Church. It’s a product of extreme differences in a marriage that “The Church” can’t address, really, in ANY way – since any action “The Church” might take to address an individual marriage situation (even one that exists in multiple marriages in which one spouse has changed dramatically) would automatically cause similar tensions in other marriages. You’re helped; the couple next to you in the pews is hurt.

In the end, at the most basic level, we are responsible for our lives. The situation you describe wasn’t caused by “The Church”; it was caused by life and a change within one person (or two). Until we recognize and accept that . . .

[Anonymous]

Old-Timer wrote:

Quote:

Show me a bitter ex-Mormon atheist married to a stubborn TBM and I’ll show you a likely divorce waiting to happen

True of any religion…Extreme differences cause extreme tensions – and working out those tensions ALWAYS includes one person sacrificing for the other OR both sacrificing for each other. If neither of those can happen, divorce is waiting to happen. I don’t mean to minimize the impact or seriousness of what you are saying, DA – but, at the most fundamental level, the quote above is a, “Duh! and?” situation…it’s not the “fault” of the Church. It’s a product of extreme differences in a marriage that “The Church” can’t address, really, in ANY way…In the end, at the most basic level, we are responsible for our lives. The situation you describe wasn’t caused by “The Church”; it was caused by life and a change within one person (or two).

I don’t believe this is really true for most other mainstream religious sects at all, in fact I think the LDS Church really has become much worse than average when it comes to attaching so much importance to differences like this. I think some negative results like this really are the Church’s fault even if unintentional because it sets so many unrealistic expectations about so many things that are typically considered either normal and expected behavior or not so bad that they are impossible to live with by most of the rest of the world with the exception of some of the most extreme fundamentalist groups. I have even heard about several divorces recently where the main reason was mostly just because one spouse didn’t believe in the Church anymore as if that was already worth getting a divorce over by itself.

Basically, if you take away the Church’s influence or replace it with a more benign church then some of these extreme differences simply would not exist to the same extent anymore. They could definitely deal with this kind of problem better than they have so far simply by focusing more on basic Christian principles like love, faith, hope, patience, etc. rather than putting quite so much emphasis on things like “testimony” of the one true church idea and temple worthiness. Not that I really expect them to change much anytime soon, but I fully expect to see more and more negative results like this the longer they try to hold onto these relatively harsh “standards” as such a defining and essential characteristic of being Mormon.

[Anonymous]

Quote:

I don’t believe this is really true for most other mainstream religious sects at all,

I’ve counseled too many people of other faiths to agree.

[Anonymous]

I concede that there is such a thing as addictive behavior related to pornography, if one defines addiction in the following ways:

1. A person finds much of their thoughts and actions continually turned to the behavior, to the exclusion of other activities the person also enjoys or know is necessary (job, family responsibility, personal commitments to others, etc…).

2. There is a pattern of increasing “levels” or types of risks associated with the behavior to heighten the effects of pleasure, and other, more simple/less risky behavior frequently no longer seems to satisfy.

3. If a period of “abstinence” from the behavior occurs, and then an opportunity or urge to do it is succumbed to, the behavior often progresses to the “worst case scenario” or most severe form of the behavior, instead of simply staying at a more minor level, even if the abstinence has been for quite some time.

4. The person is frequently unable to personally stop the behavior even when they desire to do so, desire to do something else, or even if they recognize that the behavior is maladaptive and harming them, or is illegal or risky to them.

5. The person feels compulsively driven to do the behavior, and has periods of uncontrollable feelings to do so, sometimes without warning. Willfully denying or fighting off the desire to do the behavior tends to increase the desire, and can even be physically uncomfortable to the person (shaking, cramps, depression, anxiety, irritability) and can even cause the individual to act irrationally.

6. On those occasions when the individual is not struggling under the addictive compulsive feelings, the individual will act reasonable, just like anyone else, and executes reasonable judgment and will even abhor what he/she addictively does.

7. The shame/guilt cycle is present, and frequently perpetuates the behaviors.

Questions I have: Although the church can help with the concept of accountability, arguably an important concept in breaking addictive behaviors, does the church’s role and ways of achieving this actually help or hinder the “healing” process?

Does the church perpetuate and/or encourage the guilt/shame cycle by :

-making any “normal” sexual behavior a subject of guilt and warning of ecclesiastical punishment, especially towards impressionable youth through frequent interviews, talks, “retreats”, etc…

-making all sexual behavior an abnormally large part and constant focus of morality and self worth and that anything “forbidden” that is done subsequently overrides any other moral virtues,(e.g. honesty, compassion, kindness, diligence, willingness to serve others, etc…)

-making such stringent definitions (which are often subject to local ecclesiastical authority du jour’s definition during “confession”) a part of church acceptance of an individual as well as for participation in temple attendance/ordinances, participating in priesthood ordinances (including acting as “voice”) let alone standing in the circle, public taking of the sacrament, showing spiritual acceptance by being given callings, including “leadership” ones

-discouraging more couple oriented exploration of ways to enhance one’s sexual fulfillment without being labeled as immoral by default or association?

Latterday Skeptic

[Author]

Posts