A colleague's son is
considering attending college at the University of Utah. She was talking about
a strange cultural problem he might face. Her niece, who attends Utah State
University, couldn’t find anyone to date. "The men are all Mormon*** or alcoholic."
Since I grew up in Utah and attended the University of Utah, I had some
insight.
Utah culture, like other communities that house a dominant religion (the Bible
belt comes to mind), is a yen and a yang. One part of the community practices
abstinence in a number of areas, while others visibly scramble to avoid any
association with the first part by practicing the opposite of abstinence. This
plays out in a weird circular thought process. It goes like this: all gambling addicts gamble.
If you never gamble, you never become addicted to gambling. It is better never
to start gambling. If you start gambling, you cannot go back to a place where
you did not gamble. You have already gone too far. You might as well gamble all
the time.
It is easy to see that this logic, which clearly misses some steps, can lead to
problems. By shutting down all access to certain behaviors, society appears to
be trying to address a worst-case scenario - addiction (and other deviant
behaviors). The possibility that you might be able to gamble once or even more
than once and not have it be a problem is a risk not deemed worth taking. Only
full abstinence will do.
This can leave those who try something and experience enjoyment without problems
in a bit of a quandary. They could respond by fulfilling the worst-case
expectation or they could decide that the ones enforcing abstinence are not
being truthful. In either scenario, they are out of harmony with their
community and they will be looking for an alternative.
Unfortunately, the opposite of abstinence, which is the radical acceptance of
all desires, can be just as extreme and in many ways, just as damaging. In this approach, there appears
to be no self-regulation or concern for consequences. As you can imagine, it is
not ideal for people to begin making choices that are free of consequence,
especially around the pursuit of pleasure. It leads to the dichotomy that my
colleague’s niece was describing.
Because of my upbringing and the
people I am close with, this topic continues to come up in social media and other
areas of my life. The viewpoints always seem extreme – someone is either trying
to dictate behavior or trying to push radical individualism. Both sides seem to
ignore the obligations that adults living in community have to each other. Those
obligations are simple – each individual should set boundaries, practice
self-control and demonstrate respect for others. If we are all trying to do
these things, then the details of a person’s lifestyle should not be subject to
public inspection. There will be times when someone may question whether another
person is participating appropriately or needs correction, and in those times,
our society asks us to turn to our social justice systems for guidance.
That is what works for our secular community, but we seem unable to apply a
similar framework to our communities that have a strong religious presence. This is concerning because religion can often help instill good habits and encourage positive community
behavior. It should be a welcome addition to our society and not a casualty of
itself. I believe that religion is most effective when it stops trying to exert control and
instead commits to following a few basic commands - "Do
not kill; do not commit adultery; do not steal; do not bear false witness;
honor your father and your mother; and love your neighbor as yourself."
When we stop being supportive of
and instead, try to dictate the rules for following these commands, we not only
cause societal stress, but more significantly, we risk encroaching on the grace
that is free will. This is a line I do not feel called to cross and I
caution others to be careful with it as well.
Additional reading: Pastor Joe Thorn of Redeemer Fellowship in St.
Charles, Illinois has written a wonderful article called A Theology of Wine at the
site, Doctrine and Devotion, which takes a deeper look at some of the ways
religious interpretation might cause the disconnect I am hoping to address.
***”Mormon” refers to a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day
Saints. This term is not preferable, but its use persists in casual
conversation.
