In which I try to argue that LDS moral theory and social environment actually increases the risks sexual improprieties.
Please enjoy, comment, and if so inclined, please share.
https://unexaminedfaith.blogspot.com/2020/09/lds-sexual-impropriety-and.html

Quick read, I didn't go to your references / citations; did they include FBI gathered & reported crime stats?

In general, I agree with your premise that ChurchCo warps individuals & that CULTure reaches the top & bounces back to the rank & file.

ChurchCo is bleeding internally, but who knows how serious the patient is...

That's an impressive piece of work and, I think, accurate regarding the psychological dynamics.

Thank you.

Excellent work, S. Richard. As an atheist who nevertheless strives to be moral, I particularly liked the part "Religious morality locates the source of morality outside of oneself" as this is one of my beefs with the religious.

Thanks.

Good points. However, I will just point out that externalizing morality isn't intrinsic to all religious morality. For example, these two quotes, referring to an internal moral struggle over right and wrong, come from a medieval Buddhist monk: "The purpose of the appearance in this world of [the Buddha], the lord of teachings, lies in his behavior as a human being." Another, maybe more on point, "Buddhism primarily concerns itself with victory or defeat, while secular authority is based on the principle of reward and punishment. For this reason, a Buddha is looked up to as Hero of the World."

As the second quote implies, the reward and punishment-based morality of LDS faith would be considered secular and not "religious" or, at least, a distortion of religion. These are simply examples from one religious tradition. I'm sure many religions could produce similar statements because the nature and source of morality is of long-standing concern; many thinkers have recognized the pitfalls identified in the essay.

The points of the essay are good, I simply doubt they can be said to exemplify all religion.

First: Let's assume that the statistical data you cite is correct, suggesting that deviate sexual behavior is greater in the Mormon population than the general population. (I am skeptical about this, because even if to some extent such behavior is a response to Mormon culture, there is also (arguably) an inherent and dominant Mormon inhibiting factor that would operate to suppress such conduct when it might otherwise occur. Obviously, this is a very complex social dynamic, and I doubt whether any generalities can be adequately captured in a "study" in the social sciences.

Second: Although it is generally true that religion locates the *source* of morality outside of the individual (i.e. with God), that says nothing about the "motivation" for human actions as also being external. (Your evidentiarily weak rhetorical anecdotes notwithstanding) Most people are morally motivated by their intuitions of right and wrong conduct, not by logically considering a rules-punishment calculus.

Moreover, the moral intuitions of individuals (internal?) are themselves largely thought to be the product of culture; most notably arising out of the evolution of cooperation. Thus, all such intuitions are ultimately in that sense *external.* For your argument to work you would have to add a claim that Mormon intuitions are either non-existent, ignored or suppressed in favor of your "punishment" narrative. I would argue on the contrary that Mormon intuitions are just expanded to incorporate sexual morality because of their Mormon culture. But the motivation behind the action is still what they intuitively think is right or wrong, and not what is right or wrong in spite of their moral intuitions. (If this is right, God's favor or punishment is largely an afterthought)

Notice that in most questions of morality, Mormon intuitions are the same as that of the population generally (e.g. adherence to the Golden rule) It is only within the context of sexual morality where a distinction can be drawn between Mormon dictates and *modern* culture. And this distinction is really only operative within the last few decades when the sexual revolution has taken hold.

Given the above comments, I would argue that any deviant sexual conduct in Mormons has nothing to do with any simplistic "internal-external" factor as related to ultimate moral sources. If your opening statistics are valid, the better explanation might be that the pressures associated with the moral dictate of abstinence in a contest of modern openness, creates in some people a psychological breakdown such that their moral intuitions just generally become overwhelmed by internal conflict.

I think that the most important factor in exercising real morality is to be honest with yourself while Also learning how to feel an appropriate level of empathy for others. My primary reason for resigning from Mormonism was that I felt like I couldn't be fully ethical nor true to myself if I stayed in the church. In some areas of my life, my personal standards always were higher than those set by the church and I didn't want others to see me the same as they see some others in the church who are hypocrits and liers and people of a lower character. In other areas of my life, I didn't want to be watched and badly emulated by others who didn't understand me and who weren't capable of the critical thinking needed to make good choices for themselves. When others don't live their religion in ways that don't affect me, I don't care. I never tried to use the church to make myself look better than anyone else. I don't want to be associated with a brand of person such as "Mormon". I just wanted to use the church's teachings to become a better person and for others to do the same for their own lives. The mormon church failed me in that area. In some multi-level marketing companies, you'll hear the saying that "you're in business for yourself, but not by yourself" when the exact opposite is true. You're in business by yourself but not for yourself. That is what the mormon church does to you spiritually. Everyone watches you instead of just trying to make themselves be better people. I felt like I couldn't get clean nor stay clean when associating with those people. Too many of them are immoral in ways that harm others and they lack critical thinking skills to even have a clue about what they're doing.

I learned about locus of moral authority, oh, 25 years or so ago. It really struck me. I thought, "YES! That's what's wrong with the people who claim we wouldn't know right from wrong without God! They're thinking like toddlers instead of adults."

olderelder Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "YES! That's what's wrong with the people who
> claim we wouldn't know right from wrong without
> God! They're thinking like toddlers instead of
> adults."
===============================

Bingo!

And it turns their God into a giant dog-trainer in the sky, giving treats for properly performing tricks.

And then there's the risk of being a baaaaaaad dog, and ending up in the doghouse.

I thought of myself in Mormonland as a rat pushing on a lever to get food pellets.

"The moral theory espoused by the LDS faith—morality as obedience to an external law, with a promise of reward and punishment, inhibits the internalization of morality, and leaves individuals with the belief that nothing is intrinsically wrong or right."
=============================================================

Nidus of it. Brilliant.

Would also propose it prevents the development of independent critical thought (and incisive observation required to exercise it). For there is no need to wrestle with the weighty questions of living. All answers are given; and inquiry discouraged.

So there is consequently no internal sense of control or mastery developed, as there are no dragons to confront.

This lack of mastery and control results in an anxious, fearful (and therefore compliant) people. Much easier to control.


Question I have: is it purposeful.

"The Church recently released a letter, signed by the First Presidency, instructing local leaders to not participate in any court cases without first consulting the Church’s lawyers."

I don't know enough about the law, but I'd think that this constitutes interference with the legal process.

When people say the only thing keeping them from raping and killing is God's law (or even civil law), does it mean they really would like to rape and kill, that they're right up at the invisible fence? That's scary if it's so.

By the way, God never banned rape, just fornication and adultery. In fact there were a few times he condoned rape. So those pious rapists are just staying within God's law. Because consensual sex with someone you're not married to would be almost as bad as murder, right? Because I could never figure out on my own that rape is wrong.