61906?

[mic0]

So, I posted an answer to this question, but I'm just surprised at MSJ and the reader's answers. Would knowing about a past sin really destroy a relationship? If it does, then was that relationship very deep to begin with? Or am I just strange feeling like I must know everything about my significant other and thinking he should know everything about me?

[melbabi]

This happened to someone in my immediate family. They told their significant other about a past mistake they made and the s.o. couldn't handle it and left my family member. It was sad and I obviously have biased thoughts towards that now but to answer your question, yes it does happen. And from what I understand, they were seriously talking about marriage and even went ring shopping so it at least appeared to be fairly deep. Happy ending though, my family member found someone who was able to accept their past and they recently got married. My family member's spouse also has a past so I'm wondering if that had an impact on them being able to accept each other's pasts as their pasts... hmm, I'll ask them about that.

[Katya]

This type of question has come up over and over again on the Board. I'm firmly in the "tell them" camp, but there are plenty who aren't (and they often cite Brother Bott). And, for what it's worth, we sometimes get questions in about people who are shattered by what their fiancé(e) has just told them about their past, so (along with melbabi's story) that lends some credence to the idea that some people can't handle hearing that kind of information. (However, I tend to think that Mormons are often wrongly raised with an "all or nothing" idea of sexual purity that belies our actual doctrine about the atonement. There's also the issue of being intimidated at the thought of having a wedding night with a more sexually experienced partner, but I'd suggest addressing those concerns from a psychological standpoint, not by effectively lying to your spouse.)

[NerdGirl]

I'm in the "tell them" camp if there was any actual sexual contact (as opposed to just making out a bit too much but not having any contact involving yours or the other person's genitals). I fully understand where the Brother Bott is coming from, and I think he is right that if you have been forgiven, then spiritually it is as if the sin has never been committed, but if you have had any contact with someone else that could lead to an STD (even if you haven't yet tested positive for one), your future sexual partner (ie fiance) needs to know because it can affect their health. And if it does destroy the relationship, then maybe you deserve to be in a better relationship. If someone can't forgive you and doesn't want to stay in a relationship with you because of a past mistake, then you've found out some valuable information about that person and you can end it before you end up married to them and find someone else. I wouldn't want to marry a guy who insisted on marrying a virgin (even though I am one) because I think that attitude shows a misunderstanding of the atonement and endorses the false idea that sex takes something away from you that you can never get back.

[Katya]

I wouldn't want to marry a guy who insisted on marrying a virgin (even though I am one) because I think that attitude shows a misunderstanding of the atonement and endorses the false idea that sex takes something away from you that you can never get back.

Right. Plus, does this mean that these people wouldn't be comfortable marrying someone who'd been married before, for the same reasons? (Because that also strikes me as shallow.)

I also wouldn't want to marry someone if I felt I couldn't talk to him about anything that was weighing on me.

[mic0]

melbabi, that is a sad story! I mean for them, obviously. That is a good question about whether or not the new person could accept the other's past since he had one, too. I think that is probably true, because they could better understand the other's motives, feelings through the whole process, and current perspective on the subject. Hmmm.

And Katya is right, there have been a lot of questions in the Board's history from people who heard something from their fiance and didn't know how to handle it. I guess I was just caught off guard by that comment and forgot it is a common perspective. I think this is my main issue:

I also wouldn't want to marry someone if I felt I couldn't talk to him about anything that was weighing on me.

Anyway, I have heard people say they wouldn't want to marry someone who had already been married because the other person had sex. At least if you know they were married before they wouldn't have to explain what happened, I guess.

[Katya]

I also wouldn't want to marry someone if I felt I couldn't talk to him about anything that was weighing on me.

Anyway, I have heard people say they wouldn't want to marry someone who had already been married because the other person had sex.

The most polite term I can think of for that mindset is "idiotic."

[mic0]

Agreed! To offset those people I give you the example of my cousin - he is 34 (I think) and single, and he has decided he much prefers dating women who have been married. I guess they tend to be nicer to him.

[Marduk]

I'm not firmly in the "tell them" camp. I think if it comes up, and they want to know, fine. I agree that we should be able to tell someone who will be our spouse anything that is troubling us. I think that my struggles and her struggles, after marriage, become our struggles, and so it would make sense. But I don't believe that there should be some sort of "confession" where all of this comes out in the open. That, in my mind, still plays into the idea that it is part of you. Nerdgirl, you make an interesting point about STD's, however, so in the case of someone who had multiple non-virginal partners, they ought to get tested, but that doesn't necessarily mean they still ought to tell the person.

[thebigcheese]

My family member's spouse also has a past so I'm wondering if that had an impact on them being able to accept each other's pasts as their pasts... hmm, I'll ask them about that.

Based on what I've seen, I think that's fairly common. It makes it easier to relate to one another, and accepting each other's mistakes is pretty much a given.

[mic0]

Looking back on the question again, I like what MSJ said: to be honest but nonspecific when the situation comes up. Maybe there shouldn't be a dramatic confession like Marduk said, but there could be a more low key, "Look, I've had some experience in the past, it doesn't mean anything now."

[thebigcheese]

This discussion reminds me of an AWESOME devotional given by Elder Holland in 2009. I don't remember many devotionals, but this one really stuck with me. He talks about how dwelling on someone's past mistakes can destroy their hope for a better future.

See here: http://speeches.byu.edu/reader/reader.p ... 2&x=59&y=5

[C is for]

We're going to talk about this in Marriage Prep today! I'm excited. Not that I don't already have my own opinion, but it will be interesting to have some further insight and discuss it with others. Others being people in the same room.

(It'll be primarily bringing up past pornography issues, but I'm fairly certain we'll bring up immorality too.)

[TheAnswerIs42]

Anyway, I have heard people say they wouldn't want to marry someone who had already been married because the other person had sex.

The most polite term I can think of for that mindset is "idiotic."

My mother-in-law firmly falls in this category. When my husband's sister was engaged to an amazing divorced guy, she was vehemently and vocally opposed to him because 1) her virgin daughter deserved a virgin husband and 2) she honestly saw divorced people as lesser, since they obviously cared so little about marriage that they chucked it out the window. The fact that this guy had really tried hard to make his last marriage work (she left him because he didn't make enough money) was irrelevant. My favorite moment in the family argument was when my husband tried to make the point that "maybe this guy is the best guy out there for sister, so she shouldn't pass him up just because --" but got cut off by gasps in the room that he had just insulted his sister. By saying she deserved a DIVORCED guy. Like it was the plague.

Since both of my parents were divorced before they married each other, I have to say I took personal offense to much of what she said. Ugh, I'm really glad she got over that . . . well, mostly, anyway. MIL still doesn't like him much.

[Katya]

I'm not firmly in the "tell them" camp.

I should clarify that I don't think you have to tell your S.O. all about your past (setting aside potential health issues and possibly addiction issues, as well), just that I think you should feel able to tell them, especially if it's weighing on you. Whenever we get a Board question about it, though, it's usually from someone who is troubled by the fact that the S.O. doesn't know, in which case I advise telling them. If someone sinned, repented, and feels that they've been forgiven and can move on without needing to drag it up again, I take no issue with that.

[thebigcheese]

I don't think there's a hard and fast rule about it. If you feel inclined to tell them, then do it. But I don't think there's anything wrong with leaving the past in the past, as long as you've completely moved on. But if a past addiction (or whatever else) still affects you from time to time, that's a totally different story and they absolutely need to know about that.

[Yarjka]

Generally, if you had sex with someone, that relationship was probably a meaningful one for you (whether good or bad). The way I look at it, you're getting married to someone -- you'll be together for eternity -- you can't keep yourself from talking about an important moment in your life for eternity. It's just not healthy. So, I say you should tell your s.o. whenever a good moment arises.

FWIW, my wife never had sex with anyone, but she had a couple of long-term relationships with other men before she met me (as most people do before they meet the person they are going to marry). The feelings of jealousy I have don't make any sense, because she's obviously chosen me over them, but the feelings of jealousy are still there nonetheless. I think the feelings felt by the spouse have less to do with the sex than with the idea that there is someone else out there who is competing for his/her affection.

Basically, while I agree that the Atonement wipes clean any sin, it doesn't remove an experience from your memory (that would be nice, though, in some instances).

Tolstoy has a great description of this sort of thing in Anna Karenina. When Levin is engaged to Kitty, he shares with her his diary that he kept especially for the purpose of showing his future wife. In it he has detailed all of his past mistakes and sexual experiences. Kitty's response is just fabulous, how it mixes all the emotions:

'Take them, take these terrible books!' she said, pushing away the notebooks that lay before her on the table. 'Why did you give them to me! ... No, all the same, it's better,' she added, taking pity on his desperate face. 'But it's terrible, terrible!'

He bowed his head and was silent. There was nothing he could say.

'You won't forgive me,' he whispered.

'No, I've forgiven you, but it's terrible!'

[mic0]

I don't think there's a hard and fast rule about it. If you feel inclined to tell them, then do it. But I don't think there's anything wrong with leaving the past in the past, as long as you've completely moved on. But if a past addiction (or whatever else) still affects you from time to time, that's a totally different story and they absolutely need to know about that.

Agreed! It is one thing if you are totally over something and it means nothing to you, it is another if you still hold onto it and are still working through some problem. For me, anyway, it takes a while to get over things (not just morality things, I mean) which I guess is why I have always felt I had to be honest with significant others.

Yarjka - what a great quote! And I agree, it is definitely more about the emotions involved than the actual act. (And if it is more about the actions themselves then... I don't know, that seems a little backwards to me, at least.)

[vorpal blade]

Let me just say first that in my opinion there is no one right answer to this question.

I've shared this personal experience before, but here it is again, for what it is worth. My sister tells me that her daughter married someone different from what my niece thought he had always been. Turns out that he had committed some serious sins in the past, but had been told by his bishop that he was forgiven and need never mention them again. So, he didn't mention them to my niece. A few years after the marriage the same sinful behavior resurfaced and led to their divorce. My niece now feels cheated and says that had she known of his past she would not have married him. You can argue both sides of this.

I think brother Bott has a point about the nagging doubts that can bring a marriage down and can destroy a relationship. But this can also be said of infidelity after marriage. Should a spouse confess an affair when the affair is over and that person has truly repented and wants to never repeat that sin again? Knowing that confessing the affair will destroy trust in the marriage, sow the seeds of doubt and anger, and likely destroy the marriage? What would be the point of confessing at that point? Sometimes bishops will counsel that to fully repent you need to confess your transgression to your spouse, but I've seen marriages fall apart when this information is shared. Better to know or not? What is best for the children? I don't think it is an easy call. Of course transgression before the marriage is quite different from transgression after the marriage, but there is enough in common that I wonder if we know the right answer in all cases.

Lastly, and this is controversial, I don't know if I can completely agree that with Brother Bott "that repentance makes you a new person, and you should no longer identify with the old person of sin." Eventually, after the resurrection, I'm sure this is true. But while we are still in this life? I know this sounds heretical, but I recently heard from a good source (can't remember the source) that sin leaves scars. There are consequences to sinful behavior that may not be removed in this life. I don't agree with the idea that we can be immoral before marriage, repent, and it is just as though the sin had never taken place. It is going to make a difference, in my opinion, whether you tell your significant other or not. And shouldn’t she know in advance what is going to potentially affect the success of the marriage.

[mic0]

Let me just say first that in my opinion there is no one right answer to this question.
...
I know this sounds heretical, but I recently heard from a good source (can't remember the source) that sin leaves scars.

That there is never one right answer is a good thing to keep in mind, especially with something as personal as any sort of sexual past (or other mistakes for that matter). I hope it is clear I don't think everyone should confess all their sins with no discretion; it is okay not to, I have just found that for me it is what makes my relationships better.

Also, that doesn't sound heretical. Why should it sound heretical? Your past affects your future, that is a part of life. I'd go so far as to say repentance in this life doesn't make you a "new" person, it makes you a different person, and that is good enough for now.