Thank you for sharing this with us, Melanie.

Mormons are the most codependent of people, I think, in the controlling AND caretaking sense. Perhaps other Christians are, as well.

But I agree with you, who died and made us God?

Is this post going to remain up, Anne? Your posts tend to…disappear. ;)

mfranti – great post – I have always thought about the irony that most Mormons are Republicans who, essentially, want to invoke Christian values on everyone except big business. Of course, Democrats are not immune from this either with their proclivity to try to keep tobacco away from people but legalize certain drugs. The other hard thing for me is trying to find where that line is for legislating “morals.” I really don’t know…

Given my utter fascination with local politics, this is a theme that interests me to no end. So where’s the line between overt religious-inspired control and one’s civic duty to make his environment better?

Can a religious person ever try to stop an adult bookstore from setting up shop without it being portrayed as religious babysitting?

If we truly believe that our religion inspires us and fuels us, are there “legitimate” fruits that extend into the public sphere?

I believe in free agency — including corporate free agency — but not when that free agency violates my idea of what’s acceptable. And it’s not a fully defined idea of what’s acceptable — it’s my list of what’s acceptable and it’s subject to change by my whim.

(An example of my split personality on this – I’m virulently anti-smoking near entrances to buildings. I’ve participated in efforts to ban in near entrances to buildings where I’ve worked. Yet, I have no problem allowing a barbecue joint near my house seek a zoning exception to allow cigar smoking inside. If anything, I think the smoke makes the takeout better.)

I don’t believe we should casually allow every vice to exist just so that we can appreciate virtue. Sometimes, you need to get rid of vice. If we recognize free agency, then why can’t we recognize the agency of citizens to control their own environment?

Where’s the line? And why must we always blame religion, when sometimes it’s just a matter of common decency or common sense?

I think sometimes we complain about the heavy-handedness of freaky religious wing-nuts when they come out against our own favorite vice.

Hm. Where to draw the line? I dunno. I believe in agency, but also in acting on what I believe to be true and good – not just because of religious beliefs, but because I believe some things are good to work toward for a better place to live. Being LDS brings some challenges, because sometimes I think we are perceived as busybodies when it isn’t always that way. Sometimes, it may be, but not always. Sometimes we are trying to get legislation or whatever because we care about where we live and the environment our children grow up in — not simply to force others to live our truth. There can be a difference, at least in motive, even if the outcome looks the same.

Where to draw the line?

And frankly, sometimes I just don’t trust people to be big boys and girls. Sometimes they make decisions that are pretty bad, and those decisions can affect others. It’s not just about individual choices…lots of things affect communities, families, states, even

mfranti, I’d be interested in your thoughts of where to draw that line. I believe opposition has its place, but do we always just sit back and let vice be vice and evil be evil and simply do nothing in the name of agency? If it were all about individuals in effect and consequence, maybe, but it is never that simple. Consequences aren’t just individual.

I also wonder: Would this same kind of rhetoric be applicable to environmentalists or other activists who believe we ALL need to be following their beliefs? I think #8 brings up a good point. If the standard is ‘live and let live’ it ought to apply to everyone. But heaven knows that isn’t the case in non-religion-based belief and action.

I think there are definitely a lot of shades of gray here, but this post is very relevant as so many members of the Church who are unwilling to engage the outside world in even simple ways — like inviting neighbors over for a barbecue — feel like they are influencing the world for the better by subscribing to hysterical political email lists and such. Conservative activism in behalf of all kinds of legal efforts has become a substitute for more difficult missionary work, which is always about being a good example and not being afraid to reach out to people who are not like us.

Jota,

What do you all think about serving alcohol and coffee to guests in your home?

I wouldn’t. If they come to my home, they should expect water or juice or soda or Martinelli’s. If they’re going to be offended that I don’t offer them a beer or wine, then hey don’t come over.

I won’t serve those items to guests, but I don’t mind them bringing their own beer or wine to a barbecue at my place.

…i even have a bottle of leftover vodka from my wedding in my cupboard. one day, I will put some vanilla beans in it but until then, it just sits.

Interesting.

Here’s a related question –

Should a member hesitate to get a job at a store that specializes in the sale of something that is prohibited under the WW (Starbucks, tending bar, liquor store, cigar shop, etc.)?

Also, is there a material difference between working in a store like these vs. working at a location where such service is incidental to other service (restaurant, hotel, etc.)?

Well. I make a really good chicken dish with white cooking wine. It’s to die for. I’ve never tippled, but boy, was it tempting that hot day when I made beer batter shrimp and I had some golden cold beer staring me in the face.

I suppose my guests could chug some cooking wine.

What do you think, zionssuburb? At least they go beyond one’s private home life, and begin thinking about our actions toward society at large.

i’ve had to edit this post 12 times in the last hour. Nick beat me to the punch on #7 and #9.

a coupla things, first, alcohol isn’t bad and those that drink aren’t bad people. abusing alcohol is bad (think guns) not everyone who drinks abuses. ok? agb, I understand why you wouldn’t allow alcohol consumption in your home–that’s a wise decision.

and second:

Can a religious person ever try to stop an adult bookstore from setting up shop without it being portrayed as religious babysitting?

this is a great example of people allowing the fear of the “different” to determine what they think is right for everyone else. Sex toys and books are not evil. People who use them are not sexual deviants but most (i think) folks have and idea in their heads that because there’s the s.e.x involved (and it isn’t all warm, fuzzy and wholesome) it’s evil. Lighten up.

drawing the line in ones own home is up to the individuals and like nick said, stop agonizing over it. you will know what to do when the time comes.

lighten up.

Oh, c’mon. weak weak weak. Do I want a porn store in my neighborhood. No I don’t. I have the right to voice my opinion. I’m not infringing on anyone’s agency by not wanting theatre X next door. I am free to choose, and I have chosen for myself to choose what I think is right.

The MAJORITY elected officials, and officials decided to violate my agency and give me a ticket if I choose to drive without a seatbelt, even if it doesn’t hurt anybody but myself. The elected officials set up the way alchohol is distributed in Utah.

Is it ethical of me to not allow my opinion and voice to be heard, and to take it up the rear out of respect to some other jerks “agency”.

Sorry, but while I’m respecting everyone else, I don’t think that means I have to lay down and give up.

Oh, c’mon. weak weak weak. Do I want a porn store in my neighborhood.

I have one in my SL neighborhood,the Blue Boutique, you know the one next to Red Iguana Restaraunt, across the street from Autozone and Beto’s.

It has to be somewhere, right? Oh, it’s ok to have them in the less desirable parts of town because those folks don’t care like you fine upstanding religious folk?

and why oh why does this have to get to be a discussion about what is and isn’t ok to do?

typical.

Conservative activism in behalf of all kinds of legal efforts has become a substitute for more difficult missionary work, which is always about being a good example and not being afraid to reach out to people who are not like us.

here’s where I really wan to go with this.

to quote the real m.franti:

Everybody wants to live the life of kings and queens
But nobody want to stay and plow the fields
Everybody want to tell their neighbors how to live
But nobody wants to list to how they feel

making a better world isn’t just about the removal of negative elements. it’s about rolling up our sleeves as a community and making sure that people(our neighbors) have available to them, good food, work,education, shelter, mental/health care (i am aware that there will always be a group of people who choose not to function in society)

for example,often times, they guy on the street asking for money is in need of medical/mental attention but since he doesn’t have insurance, he doesn’t have access to meds. He also can’t have a job because he’s not fit to work due to his mental illness.

i realize that this is a very simple example but take it step further and consider that kids who end up in gangs are victims of the same system. They need to survive and that’s what they do, survive, for a little while at least.

in this country we have gotten so good at slapping little tweety bird band aid on gaping wounds and then blame it on the guy who’s bleeding.

Here in Anchorage we have several Sex Shops. One is called the castle. If they replaced all the Sexual Aides, Adult Magazines and DVDs with Hollywood movies, popcorn, candy, and video games, you would think you were in a Blockbuster. In fact the employees are more helpful than the ones at Blockbuster. There are windows to let in natural light and a knowledgeable helpful staff. If isn’t sleazy at all.

Things aren’t bad. It would ‘Beg The Question’ to say that Movie Camaras are Bad because people use them to recored naked bodies with them. This Pseudo-Logic is false.

annegb – I bet some of those RS women who protest the use of sexual aides have a stock pile of them in their dressers. People who tend to talk disproportionately about a subject tent to secretly hold dear to the principles they outwardly protest. (Sorry annegb, I didn’t want to give you that kind of visual about your RS Sisters.)

Jamie:

People who tend to talk disproportionately about a subject tent to secretly hold dear to the principles they outwardly protest

This “truism” is easily falsifiable and in fact, is false. This is like saying Rosa Parks secretly wanted to sit in the back of the bus.

It’s called letting the market decide. I am part of the Market. I am allowed to voice my opinion that I do not want it there. It is part of my agency. Let the Majority rule. If the Majority want a porn store, that’s fine, but if the majority don’t…

…and since you are an educated,English speaking, employed, voting member of society, you get to say, not in my back yard but “over there” looks like a good place. And the city council members that you voted into office who,by the way, look just like you and not the guys “over there”, agree…

The preteen African boy fighting in a militia affects me, even if only indirectly. It’s difficult to have a live and let live attitude when I know that even little things will drastically change the world my children and grandchildren will live in.

to this I totally agree and your example reminds me of my reaction to Blood Diamond- the scene where the older boy injects heroine into an 8 year old boy made me sob like a mother who’s failed.

on topic-

the point of the post is to remind folks that just because some actions by other folks make “you feel uncomfortable” doesn’t mean they are all wrong/evil/bad. You have a choice and you may let your religion guide you in your decisions but it’s important the we religious folk, allow the next guy to exercise his freedom of concious in the same manner you exercised yours.

as for 13 y/o boys…you need to be over 18 to patron a store like that-they check id’s.

Do I want a porn store in my neighborhood. No I don’t.

Why not? Would it upset you to see people who might be having more fun than you are? Just think—if it was close to your home, you could enjoy the smug satisfaction of seeing members of your own ward shop there, while you bask in the light of your personal righteousness.

Is it ethical of me to not allow my opinion and voice to be heard, and to take it up the rear out of respect to some other jerks “agency”.

The problem comes more when you apply your personal minority religous faith, and as a result, choose to make your voice heard about whether others, as you put it so delicately, “take it up the rear.”

I think sex toys and stores could be evil and could encourage deviancy.

What is “deviancy?” For many, anything other than man-on-woman, missionary position, and lights out is “deviant.”

making a better world isn’t just about the removal of negative elements. it’s about rolling up our sleeves as a community and making sure that people(our neighbors) have available to them, good food, work,education, shelter, mental/health care

Yes, but for some reason, many of a religious bent take far more satisfaction in condemning the “wicked” to Hell, than they do in being compassionate or serving others.

35. Matt W.

Tend. Tend is the key word. We have seen Politicians talk about evil Gay people and come to find out, they are Gay also. We have seen religious figures talk down about sex outside of marriage only to be caught having sex with a prostitute. You cannot Hate something or someone without having a strong emotion for them or it. Hate isn’t the the opposite of Love.

The opposite of love is indifference.

..but they will come

Some people don’t care if there is a porn store in their neighborhood. . . but you move in a Super Walmart and the people get bent out of shape.

Well, considering how WalMart treats its employees, not to mention how the company quite regularly drives smaller local merchants out of business…..

mfranti:
they do check ids, and in some places you need to be over 21, but why do “they” check ids? because we told them too at one point, in the same way I am willing to tell them, I don’t want you here.

Thansk for Borat, that was a good laugh.

Nick:
Yes, but for some reason, many of a religious bent take far more satisfaction in condemning the “wicked” to Hell, than they do in being compassionate or serving others.
and many people named Nick are selfish, even murderers. See, disparaging generalizations aren’t useful.

Mormons, theologically speaking, don’t condem the wicked to hell. You know this.

What is “deviancy?” For many, anything other than man-on-woman, missionary position, and lights out is “deviant.”
and for many Murder and Rape are deviancy. In fact, Many rapists and murderers view pornography. generalizations again.

The problem comes more when you apply your personal minority religous faith, and as a result, choose to make your voice heard…
What’s wrong with making my voice heard? Why can I not make my voice heard but you can make yours heard? Not sensible.

Why not? Would it upset you to see people who might be having more fun than you are? Just think—if it was close to your home, you could enjoy the smug satisfaction of seeing members of your own ward shop there, while you bask in the light of your personal righteousness.
As for the fun statement, that’s stupid. By the way I love how you can be self-righteous in your contempt of my self-righteousness. Isn’t it funny how you and I both don’t see ourselves as self-righteous, whereas when we talk like this, we both think the other is the epitome of evil? Me because I think pornography is bad for people and don’t want a bad influence near me if I can help it, while you because you think I’m a bad influence and don’t want me near you if you can help it. Yet you keep trying to change me, which goes back to being on topic.

What we need is a Porn Store run like Walmart. Now that would be evil.

;-)

Mormons, theologically speaking, don’t condem the wicked to hell. You know this.

Then why do you bother making the point, particularly when I said “many of a religious bent,” and did not say “Mormons,” or even “LDS?”

Nick 46: when did I describe attmepting to impose my moral judgments? And further, why is it wrong to do so? Aren’t you trying to impose your moral judgments on me.

Thanks for the seat belt info, I’ll use it nex time someone tries to tell me the government is violating their rights by making them wear a seatbelt and it doesn’t affect anyone but them. And thanks for proving my point that I should, in fact, care about what others do because it does directly impact me…

Dan 54: can’t we be activists against certain things and reach out in firendship?

Ann, I don’t get your comment. Was that some form of snark against me expressing my point fo view?

52. Matt W.

I am against pedophilia because children don’t ask for their freedom and innocence to be taken away. I am against it because adults who seek sexual relationships with children have deeply rooted personal mental issues that damage and hurt their victims. I am against it because people need to learn to be human beings before they can learn to be sexual beings. I am against it because it isn’t about sex it’s about the total control of a helpless individual. Yes, I am against it. I am not against it just because it is wrong. It is wrong because of the circumstances surrounding it. I think it is a sick practice as does most of the civilized world. Even if the majority ruled it was legalized, my views would not change.

Matt W. – Way to throw in the Criminally Insane Cliche out there. That was totally inappropriate. There is an honor code among fellow citizens. Never bring children into an adult conversation. I don’t hate you. I think you just has a laps of ignorance (lack of knowledge, education, or awareness) compounded by your immature needs as you were caught up in the act of trying to be clever.

Jamie 61: I totally agree with you. And I don’t think you are against it because you secretly want to have sex with a child. And I think you are fine in voting and being an activist in such a way as to stand behind your convictions

I also don’t hate you. I actually really like you. I don’t recall throwing the “criminally insane” cliche out there. There is an honor code among fellow citizens, I guess, and I believe it gives me the right to say I don’t want a porn store in my neighborhood and to vote and be active accordingly. It even gives me the right to think if the government restricts how liquor can be sold, that’s ok by me.

I’m not trying to be clever.

Jamie 62- explain the humor to me, I don’t know where wickedness or smiting even come into this conversation, so I am at a contextual deficit.

63. Matt W.

I am with you on not having a Porn store next to my house. But I don’t want my neighbors broken down truck next to my house either. It is the reasoning behind is the issue. There are places for everything and everything in its place.

Getting back to the topic at hand:

I believe that vice serves a purpose and however trite this will sound, without it we cannot value virtues.

Adam and Eve didn’t just eat of the fruit of knowledge of Good, but also Evil. Then there are the gray areas. This is up to us to discern.

Jamie 67:
I agree with this concept of vices serving a purpose, but I don’t think I should celebrate my vices. I can be irrational, dramatic, over-react, and all those things. I have a hot temper, and am lazy, etc etc. That doesn’t mean I should celebrate that I am all these things within myself.

As for Good and Evil, I don’t think we need to go looking for evil. We don’t need to try drunk driving so we can appreciate sober driving.

There are gray areas, and there are areas that are black for me right now, but will be white for me at a different time in a different place. It is all very complicated.

I agree with this concept of vices serving a purpose, but I don’t think I should celebrate my vices…As for Good and Evil, I don’t think we need to go looking for evil. We don’t need to try drunk driving so we can appreciate sober driving.

i am always amazed at what people will take away from a conversation. who said anything about celebrating?

we are talking about choice here. if you get to choose your level of morality, than so does the next guy as long as it doesn’t hurt or violate the rights of others.

as a side note:

you guys are probably thinking that i must drive my poor husband nuts.

well, I do. mostly because I don’t remember to put my keys away in the same place every time.

Matt W. (50),
Correct- establishing parameters for the behavior of the market is an action of the market.

mfranti (74),
I agree, to some extent; as a general rule, I think if a member of the Church wants to engage in lobbying against a certain influence in the community, that person should have a 1:1 ratio of activism to constructive engagement. If I spend an entire day printing and distributing flyers opposing a Victoria’s Secret billboard, then I should spend an equal amount of time volunteering and engaging the community in ways that show what I am for, instead of constantly reacting to what I’m against.
This is why I can’t stand Utah politics, and tangentally, most of the left’s criticism of the Bush administration. There are so many people who spend way too much time b*tching about things they oppose, instead of offering constructive alternatives.
The movie Chocolat had an interesting message, talking about how a town had come to define their morality by things they don’t do.

Good post, mfranti. It’s quite natural for people to Lord morality over others, to get people to do things for their own good.

The threshold that you mention, the one that respects other people’s rights, is generally recognized. People universally assent to the notion that aggressive invasions of other people’s rights is off limits (provided that it occurs outside the realm of procedural justice). One strange consequence of this threshold is that it creates an incentive to contrive explanations for how someone else’s vices will have a negative impact on those with whom she associates. This strikes me as dangerous. This drive that people feel to define their own moral hobbyhorses such that they impact others has created an ever-lengthening list of contagious diseases and syndromes.

It reminds me of the apocryphal story of the guy on death row who claimed that his road to murder started with a cup of coffee. Thankfully, thoughtful people are reluctant to accept the self-diagnosis of a sociopath. Otherwise, if this story were true, it would surely be grounds (no pun intended) for actually banning coffee.

There’s been a recent effort to define fatness — personal fatness, like when you say “he’s really fat” — as contagious, both by correlating it to certain viruses and by blaming it on social influencing of norms. Perversion and violence are also contagious. You can get them just from watching violence and perversion. So by this reasoning, we should legislate against fat people, porn, and depictions of violence. (Is two out of three good enough?)

C. Everett Koop, the Surgeon General during the Reagan Administration, did this same kind of thing with smoking. He detested it so much that he contrived a way to convince people that they’d actually get diseases from being around people who smoke. It took about a decade for Koop’s crazy notion to catch on, but it has, and now they’re even banning smoking outdoors in some places. Why? Because people actually believe that it’s bad for them when other people smoke(!)

The craziest thing about the epidemics created by these questionable contagions is that there’s no hope for a vaccine.

Thank you so much for being doing a guest post for us. I hope you enjoy it.

Jamie Trwth, we’re in agreement. I’m glad to hear you’re not turning all PacMan on us.

mfranti: I have one in my SL neighborhood, the Blue Boutique, you know the one next to Red Iguana Restaraunt…

I love the Red Iguana. It’s one of the best Mexican Restaurants anywhere.

Respecting someone’s agency does not require you to be silent.

One does not need to yell or get in someone’s face in order to politely and humbly say “Uh, I don’t think that is a good thing.”

There is a time to be silent, and a time to speak up. I think I read that in the Bible. Somewhere.

DKL:

Thank you so much for being doing a guest post for us. I hope you enjoy it.

it has been so much fun posting over here. i love,love,love this blog and i might just have to do it again.

thanks for playing along and thanks for letting me take up space.

This is a great topic, Melanie, and one every one of us needs to consider and make up our mind on. I’ve learned from it.

Bookslinger, I like your point. But what does that mean, not staying silent? Does it mean picketing?

Adult bookstores, for instance, I wouldn’t want to live next door to one. But how does one do what you say? I’m asking, not arguing. Really.

Can anyone recommend a good LDS blog that talks about making ourselves better at living the Gospel instead of lecturing people how not to act and then announcing that anyone that doesn’t do it your way is wrong?

Ok Everybody. Yesterday I went to one of the Adult Stores here in town (the look). I thought I would go for, lets say “Research”. It is mostly a clothing and shoe store. The clothes are of the sexy variety. The upstairs holds the men’s clothing was well as a little corner that is the toy store. And you know what? The ladies that worked there weren’t sleazy at all. In fact they were all dressed neater than most persons their age. One was Pierced that I noticed but I think it is a prerequisit for working there. But I might be wrong.

Even though I went to an Adult Store for ‘Research’ It still didn’t change my mind about the Pornography they sell. Just as frequenting a grocery store which sells cigarette doesn’t change my mind about smoking.

Tolerance [The capacity for or the practice of recognizing and respecting the beliefs or practices of others.] is what we can give.

We are not asking for Acceptance [To receive (something offered), especially with gladness or approval:].

Sometimes we get this these two word mixed up in their definitions.

MattThurston,

dead on!

i’m laughing my bum off cus it’s true. (should i not know this?)

Uh, I meant my first paragraph in #92 to be a compliment, although as I read it over now it is kind of a strange compliment, to be sure. Kind of personal, I guess. Which is not to say that people who do not frequent adult stores, nor benefit from their wares, (or who do and don’t admit to it) are not worthy of a compliment… it’s all good… um, I’m digging a deeper hole, aren’t I… nevermind…

Yeah, so, Marie Osmond really took a spill the other night, didn’t she?

Here I leave you with one last quote:

It is a truism that almost any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.
Robert A. Heinlein

Hi there,

I’m late to post but this is an interesting subject. I buy white and red whine to cook with at the liquor store. While I’m there, I usually pick up some tequila so we can have margaritas for guests and husband when we entertain. I don’t feel one bit guilty about any of it. If anything, I’m annoyed I can’t just pick it up at the grocery store.

I also purchase adult novelties and toys. I don’t think this makes me a bad person. It enhances something that my husband and I share. While I wouldn’t want a porn shop set up in my neighborhood, I have no problem with the Blue Boutique and others. In fact, it would be handy if they were a little closer to where I live.

I don’t think that seeing these shops encourages immoral behavior any more than seeing a beer on the shelf encourages it. I think it is time for people (Mormons and all) to grow up a little bit. Accept that there are things out there that you aren’t going to agree with, but also accept that others DO agree with those things.

I’m probably way out of line with the things I believe, but I just am tired of being an adult treated like I’m still in HS (by the politicians who run this state and make the decisions) and by the judgmental people out there who are so quick to point fingers.

To each his/her own.

Don’t you think that most people in positions of leadership (politicians etc) vote based on what they believe is right, religious or not? I don’t agree with it. Honestly, I wish people would vote or make decisions based on the people they represent more than their own biases, but who knows if that is even possible.

Going into discussions with your mind made up, to me, is a bit narrow minded. A politician should remember the PEOPLE he is representing. Not just a specific group of people with whom he happens to share religious affiliation.

Don’t you have to be willing to look at ALL sides of an argument when you are in such a position? You have to decide what is best for the group as a whole and set aside your religious beliefs in the process. Otherwise you are forcing the general public to live YOUR religion and standards.

YMMV

Am I allowed to vote against a liquor license for a strip club if I think both are wrong? Even if it “might” bring in some business?

of course you do. However,I would encourage you to examine your motives. Are you trying to stop people from lascivious behaviour because YOU perceive it as immoral? or are you trying to prevent sprawl?

Maybe I believe taxes are dreadfully sinful, but should I vote to increase taxes to fund a library for the children?

Taxes are sinful?i must have missed that SS lesson. I’m for sure going to hell because I’m all about paying for the public services I use. Kind of like my tithing to the state, no?

What’s the general case for allowing your religious beliefs to influence your public decisions?

i tend to think that my religious conviction is just that, mine. I don’t know if I have any place in letting my religious beliefs dictate what’s right for the rest of my neighbors. like i said before, examining motives is a good place to start.

could you imagine if a [religious] group decided they didn’t like our theology and they had the power to create
laws intended to stifle us because they felt we were immoral for believing in living Prophets Or because we believe that God has a body or because…

this goes both ways. I don’t have all the answers–Just doing the best I can. As you are.

Late to this Post:

This thread has confused me thoroughly. One interesting thing is that it is hardest for the side of tolerance to respect the side of choice. Yeah, you can have a dealer of pornography on your street corner, if you can convince enough people that pornography and masturbation are not harmful to society. If not, you should be able to accept that there is opposition-no matter what form or argument it comes in. That should be enough to fulfill your criteria, M.

Although I agree that grass roots positive influence and activism is more important than simply voting no or berating someone’s opinions. However, if this is saying that activism is the only way then we miss the idea of defending liberty, families, and rights to believe and vote according to our own conscience. Both must be done, and each is a function of the other in a way.

101-
“I would encourage you to examine your motives. Are you trying to stop people from lascivious behaviour because YOU perceive it as immoral?”

Missionary work. Bring to pass the immortality and Eternal Life of man. Not “a few have to go, so let them do whatever.” There is a thing called stewardship. If we thought along those lines, bring on global warming, bring on second hand smoke killing me, bring on drunk driving. There are things that are immoral. Those are the tennants of our Faith. We have commandments, laws, and counsel from prophets. Those are what we answer to. Not the relative philosophies of the times. We try to live our Faith, and if that leads us to make decisions based heavily on our values, accept that. If you cannot, you have made a decision based heavily on your own values. Niether side is different from the other in this discussion. The problem for one side lies in that this was posted on a “Mormon” blog site.