Leaderboard

Amen. I'm puzzled why you're getting any pushback on this thread at all. Alma 5:34: "Yea, he saith: Come unto me and ye shall partake of the fruit of the tree of life; yea, ye shall eat and drink of the bread and the waters of life freely" In my life, I've found that whenever there's a long-term failure to receive the sustaining waters of life, it's because I've forgotten to abide by the basic doctrine of Christ found in 3 Nephi 11: "32 And this is my doctrine, and it is the doctrine which the Father hath given unto me; and I bear record of the Father, and the Father beareth record of me, and the Holy Ghost beareth record of the Father and me; and I bear record that the Father commandeth all men, everywhere, to repent and believe in me. 33 And whoso believeth in me, and is baptized, the same shall be saved; and they are they who shall inherit the kingdom of God. 34 And whoso believeth not in me, and is not baptized, shall be damned. 35 Verily, verily, I say unto you, that this is my doctrine, and I bear record of it from the Father; and whoso believeth in me believeth in the Father also; and unto him will the Father bear record of me, for he will visit him with fire and with the Holy Ghost. 36 And thus will the Father bear record of me, and the Holy Ghost will bear record unto him of the Father and me; for the Father, and I, and the Holy Ghost are one. 37 And again I say unto you, ye must repent, and become as a little child, and be baptized in my name, or ye can in nowise receive these things. 38 And again I say unto you, ye must repent, and be baptized in my name, and become as a little child, or ye can in nowise inherit the kingdom of God. 39 Verily, verily, I say unto you, that this is my doctrine, and whoso buildeth upon this buildeth upon my rock, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against them." Thanks for the post, PC.

I'm going to have to double-down on my offense. It's possible that one or more of her husbands died--but all five? Okay, possible, but not likely. More importantly, "shacking up" is a bit old-fashioned. It's not modern. It's between one and two generations old--back when it was shameful to live together outside of wedlock. "Shacking up" is derogatory--it's meant to be. If you prefer the older-fashioned "living in sin," we could go with that, I suppose. :-) Mind you--I'm not casting condemnation on the woman at the well. She ended as an evangelist (missionary) to her own people. Talk about an "I once was lost, but now am found" story! It's beautiful. Redemption and grace are powerful. BUT...how can we wax eloquent about grace, mercy, forgiveness, salvation, and redemption if we keep being politically correct and nice about how we label sin? If we refuse to be "judgmental" about sin, then what exactly are we hoping folk we get saved from?

I agree with this however, if they volunteer to do a specific task and ask if they can do it for you I say let them do it if you feel that they can do it well and correctly. Many want the chance to do service and should we deny them the opportunity if they ask if they can help?

That's a lot of hair to take care of, Anatess. Most of my life, my hair was mid-back; I am mixed black & white and my hair is curly. When I was on the east coast, I'd have Dominicans or Puerto Ricans deal with it in the salon. In high school, when straight hair was the style, I had to use huge rollers or iron it. A lot of angina. Plus, bad experiences left me afraid of hair stylists. I would just cut the ends myself and use Nice n'Easy. I pulled it back in a bun or pony tail a lot because it was just easier to deal with that way. Well, styles changed and I found I could go out in public with curly hair. When I started worked again after grad school, I braved the stylist again and had her color and cut. I found that at a medium length, with a great cut, I can wash it and go. Since then, since I'm a Mormon and all and don't spend my money on liquor and cigarettes, I decided I would always treat myself to getting a professional cut and color. When it's freshly done, I look darned cute and I feel like a grown up. For some reason, having a head of curly hair always makes me feel like I'm somebody's mom or some hippie chick (OK, I'm guilty of both,actually), and not the cut throat lawyer or demon professor that I am.

Jesus promises that He will instill in us a fountain of living water that shall never run dry. "Well, that's for the faithful folks--the active ones--those with multiple callings, up-to-date home visitations, and church giving that far surpasses the tithe and standard offerings." Really? Jesus made that promise to a 5-time divorcee Samaritan woman, who was shacking up with her boyfriend. He promised her greenness, moistness, and vitality. Life--a fount that would never run dry. Maybe it's time to get back to the essential--to Jesus? When He is the center we can endure/bare all things.

I'm not responding to what you're saying Pam, obviously, but to other's comments here. I'm just using your post as a springboard... The first presidency guides are not tools by which we are meant to judge others. We should use these guides to improve our own efforts. Sitting in judgment of others during testimony meeting is a sure way to not feel the Spirit. On the other hand, if we approach it with compassion, acceptance, truly listening for the messages' intent, we can, and will be taught by the Spirit, even when others' testimonies are poorly executed. I am, frankly, shocked at the judgment some have. Do we really love our neighbors so little? Wow! It's one thing to preach principle (something I do often, and am accused of judging for). It's another thing entirely to sit and criticize people for their weaknesses.

Confirmation bias is definitely a real thing, and I think it show up frequently in the way religious people interpret their experience. As personal as religious experience can be, it might be a necessary part of religious experience that cannot be completely eliminated from the equation. I don't think God choosing our paths violates our free agency. He always lets us choose whether we will follow Him or choose to follow our own paths. Based on several scriptures, I think much of the "test" of this life is determining whether or not we will follow God wherever He chooses to lead us. In many ways, I think I can agree that other people's spiritual experiences have no bearing on the validity of my own experiences and my experiences have not bearing on other's. Other's can claim I have been misled by a false spirit, but they cannot really prove it to me. I can claim that others have been misled by false spirits, but they are under no obligation to heed what I say. In principle, then, that seems true to me. But it also seems to lead me back to the same conclusion. If the only thing I really have is my own spiritual experiences suggesting to me the path God wants me to follow, then all I can really do is follow that path until He chooses to correct my errors. and that is all that anyone of us can really do.

Thoughts and prayers going your way . . .

In essence, I agree with your statement, however I haven't read any evidence that God recommend Adam and Eve to partake of the fruit. Why would a perfect God recommend and then forbid Adam and Eve to partake -- which would appear contradictory to me. I would agree God proposed the plan. God provided us with knowledge regarding this plan. The temple provides us with knowledge concerning the state of mind Adam had when he was placed in the garden...how then did Adam gain this knowledge regarding the tree? I can't think of any reason as a Father where I would recommend something, and then forbid it later, but then again, this could be a celestial law by which I am unware of.

It's fairly presumptuous to presume that because others don't speak their testimony in the way that you would that it must be wrong. It's fairly presumptuous to presume that they're doing it just for their "15 minutes" when public speaking is known to be one of the greatest fears people have. So after they make this extreme effort to stand up in front of everyone and do their best, you're sitting there judging them because they didn't do it the way you would have? Hmm... I have no doubt that many people do not give testimonies the way they should be, but lets cut them a little slack here. He who is without sin cast the first stone and all that.

Taking his aid doesn't mean you can't do something extra-nice for him in return . . . maybe take some of the money you would have spent on a plumber and give him (and his wife!) a gift certificate to a nice restaurant and an evening of free babysitting?

You brought up some interesting points and I thought perhaps we should start a new thread. However, this thread is specifically about the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. I have stated a number of times that I personally believe a great deal of information is missing from scripture and revelation concerning the tree. I do not believe G-d made up a tree and rules about the tree in an effort to trick mankind into the fall. That just is not the sort of thing I understand about G-d. Therefore I see the whole doctrine of the tree of knowledge of good and evil to be symbolic. The question is – What is the tree and what does it represent? We LDS know that the partaking of the tree of knowledge of good and evil was a pivotal, important and necessary part of The Father’s plan from the very inception of his plan. Partaking of the tree and bringing about the fall was and has always been the plan. And this is not a plan B – it is plan A from the start. I do not believe G-d makes up unjust or unnecessary laws. I do not believe that G-d made up death to be associated with the tree just so mankind would have something to stumble into mortality with, talk, wonder about and forever ask questions. I believe death is the only possible result for anyone engaged in understanding the knowledge of good and evil. I believe G-d did not create the condition, choice or the result but rather in his wisdom he utilized the just and true principles in the only way they could be utilized for the benefit of those seeking such wisdom. I have said this before – that it is reasonable to my thinking and rhetorical logic that all that have a mortal experience choose to partake of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. It was not an Adam and Eve only choice. I would also point out that every reference in scripture concerning fruit and commandments is symbolic and not associated with some tree anywhere. I would also point out that having a mortal body in order to suffer physical and spiritual death is the only way in all eternity to come by the knowledge of good and evil. I believe if there was another viable way G-d would have offered that possibility and even recommended it. And finally I would make a point about making “rules” in one’s home. The idea of live by my rules or leave is, in my mind, the attitude of Satan rather than G-d. I believe the attitude of G-d is to instruct concerning correct principles and let individuals govern themselves – meaning to achieve the blessings or suffer the consequences of principles and laws that are just and true and have no bearing on wants or desires. As odd as it may seem to some – I believe Satan was excommunicated from the society of heaven. Not for the benefit of the society of heaven but for the benefit of Satan. Because Satan could not abide heavenly society of G-d any better than we could abide on the sun. (see I can also use symbolism to put forth an idea)

Yep you're right. Testimonies should be just that. Their testimony. Not about the latest trip to the mall or the funny things their dog did during week. I think people confuse it with a "let me catch you up with my life." kind of thing and forget really what testimony meeting is intended for.

Whenever there is a post that focuses on grace and rest and God's sustenance for us, there are those who fear that such focus will provide unwarranted cover for those who are lazy about the things of God. Even in the evangelical world, with our teaching of salvation by faith alone, we often decry the "cheap grace" that deludes people into thinking they can live for the Devil, while claiming to follow Jesus. On the other hand, when a post focuses on the benefits of spiritual disciplines (tithing, fasting, clothing modesty, WoW observance, etc.) there are those who will almost automatically respond that God is full of grace, mercy, rest, and that he delights when his children can relax and enjoy life. More often than not these reactions are not a criticism of the original post, but are reflections of where the respondent is at spiritually.

Sorry man, I also stand by what I said, b/c that is exactly how it came across to me as a non-LDS browser. Perhaps you didn't mean for it to come across as arrogant as it did, but it did. "The fact that people become "converts" to all sorts of things based on their feelings does not invalidate the witness of someone who has truly received communication from God. The cynicism of this approach is not useful. It's also not useful to teach those filled with pride and their own sense of wisdom that they must be humble and submissive. It does no good to explain to those who have never seen and felt the sun that their false claims of sunlight are blatantly obvious to those who have come out of the darkness if they refuse to experiment upon your path to the light themselves." "Those on the other side of the aisle, as you put it, may be blinded, confused, unknowledgeable, or unfamiliar. That does not make them bad, but it doesn't prove that someone who has had a true witness of the Spirit is also confused." "I believe that anyone who would so contend ("I have a spiritual witness that the Book of Mormon is false" or the like) is, at some level, deceiving themselves." The "warm fuzzies" are not what I referred to as arrogant, I couldn't agree more with you more on that point, I'm referring to you judging the previous poster, implying that they have never received "pure knowledge" from the Spirit, and inserting your own garbage into what the previous poster wrote, about not converting based on emotion, you quoted her and replied, "And reason doesn't? You mean to tell me that every "reasonable" thought you've ever had you still retain? So what you considered reasonable when you were 2 years old is still your view? So what we once thought was reasonable concerning science has never changed? You are incapable or unwilling to every update or alter your reason? Sounds like a sure path to growth". This is unnecessary and not at all what the poster was trying to say. If I have shown any arrogance, then God will judge me, but I will never deny you, nor any other Christian a truly authentic witness when it comes to the Holy Spirit and Truth, even if it leads them to a Church that I don't understand. That is why I'm here, on this forum, to better understand my brothers and sisters in Christ, to learn directly from those who are authentically living their faith, rather than go to anti-mormon sites. God bless!

I used to post here with the profle name Matthew0059. About 4 months ago, I began changing online screen names and information to reflect my actual identity, hence the new account name. I'm excited by the new look and look forward to posting again! It's been... I don't know, 6 months to a year? A long time... I'll be on here and there as I can, between school and work.

Joseph Fielding Smith; "“Adam and Eve were chosen to come here as the primal parents of humanity. And they were placed in the Garden of Eden where there was no death and we read in the scriptures that they could have lived in that Garden forever, but not under the most favorable circumstances. For there, although they were in the presence of God, they were deprived of certain knowledge and understanding in a condition where they could not understand clearly things that were necessary for them to know. Therefore, it became essential to their salvation and to ours that their nature should be changed. The only way it could be changed was by the violation of the law under which they were at that time. Mortality could not come without violation of that law and mortality was essential, a step towards our exaltation. Therefore, Adam partook of the forbidden fruit, forbidden in a rather peculiar manner for it is the only place in all the history where we read that the Lord forbade something and yet said, ‘Nevertheless thou mayest choose for thyself.’ He never said that of any sin. I do not look upon Adam’s fall as a sin, although it was a transgression of the law. It had to be. And Adam came under a different law. The temporal law. And he became subject to death." What law did they violate? The Garden of Eden law. Which is why I am saying it seems that the eating of the tree of knowledge was the way out of the Garden of Eden. God recommended that they not stay in the Garden of Eden forever. They could choose when they were ready to leave by violating the law of Paradise. Just like if I were to say that in my house my young adult children are under my rules. If you cant follow my rules then leave the house and be on your own. They wouldn't have to break the rules to leave, they could simply say, 'I can't expect to become a responsible person if I don't get out on my own and therefore I am not willing to live under your wing forever'. They knew that they were going to be the "primal parents" and they knew that it was essential that their nature should change. I can't imagine they would have just gotten those two statements alone without any further details as to what does "primal parent" mean and 'what does it mean to have our nature change'. Change from what and how? would have certainly been part of the discussion and presented as part of the plan. I am sure we all asked those questions without having the certain knowledge as President Smith says, this is knowledge of pain and sorrow; "He [Adam] had knowledge, of course. He could speak. He could converse. There were many things he could be taught and was taught; but under the conditions in which he was living at that time it was impossible for him to visualize or understand the power of good and evil. He did not know what pain was. He did not know what sorrow was; and a thousand other things that have come to us in this life that Adam did not know in the Garden of Eden and could not understand and would not have known had he remained there." And Marion G. Romney; "Adam voluntarily, and with full knowledge of the consequences, partook of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, that men might be. … For his service we owe Adam an immeasurable debt of gratitude" Where did Adam obtain that knowledge ahead of time for which we have an "immeasurable debt of gratitude"? If it was anything less than following God's recommendation than I don't think we would be grateful for it. I don't think we would have a debt of gratitude for him going against God's plan.

I usually enjoy reading your posts TFP, however, your arrogance in this post, is a bit over the top. Who are you to assume that this poster has never had any spiritual experiences, or witnesses, that has led him/her to where they are now? Simply b/c this person is not LDS, you assume they couldn't have possibly felt the Spirit?? *Facepalm* Lack of humility indeed!! The OP is a very valid question, and as someone who ardently prayed and fasted about the veracity of the BOM and received a very definite negative witness, your ignorant replies that those on the "other side" are somehow deceiving themselves is insulting. Have I felt the Holy Spirit? Can I tell the difference between mere emotions and a truly answered prayer? YES, YES and YES. I have felt God Himself physically present before me, Love so great there are zero words in the human language to adequately describe Him and just how beautiful He is (I had no visual, but trust me, I didn't need one, I probably would've passed out!!!). He didn't speak audible words to me, but He spoke gently to my heart, my very soul, just how much He loved ME. This beautiful grace, so completely unexpected, is more than I could have ever hoped to receive, but I know now that that is what I was made for, to receive this Love and to love Him in return w/everything that I am, and that is what I strive for each and every day. This is only one of many, many experiences, which can only be ascribed to God, which have guided me into the faith I am now, and I couldn't be anymore in love with Love! A joy so great, I feel as though I could burst at times, and a peace in my soul that surpasses anything I've known or felt before. Freedom so sweet, I know that there truly is nothing in this world to fear. And I believe that you, as a mormon, can feel this too, I refuse to box this in as only a thing Catholics can know and experience. So do I believe other people of other faiths can also receive spiritual experiences by the Holy Spirit? Yes I do! I believe God loves ALL of us so much that He is always calling to us, calling us to Himself, no matter what religion we ascribe to. We are all on our own path home to God, and none of our paths are identical with anyone else's path. Your cross to carry is not my cross. And to those who truly love God and wish to know Him and listen to Him, they will receive witnesses from the Holy Spirit that God does exist and He loves us. God will take each of us where we are and guide us to Himself in a way best suited to each individual. Gods ways are mysterious, but I have faith that He will always bring the good about in every situation b/c He loves us so much. I have been in the daylight too Sir, and I know I have, regardless of whether or not you believe it to be possible. God bless!

Hmmmm. It is my understanding that Christ drank the bitter cup when he did not really want to. Many would argue he did want to for reasons that were important to him. But I think I understand because I have done things I did not want to because I believed and had faith that something worthwhile would come of it – and not just for me. It is part of my understanding of discipline. That we learn to do the right thing rather than do what we want thinking it is the right thing. Some may not understand this difference and I am not about to make them understand – even though I often think I would really like to make them. Let me put it this way Seminary - I see the natural man as someone that does what they want - A saint of G-d is someone that has faith that what G-d as of them is what they really want even though they do not realize it yet.

Being extremely independent and allowing other individuals to serve me is very difficult. However, I have learned that many times there are blessings associated with serving others and that by giving others the opportunity to serve me, I am helping them have access to the blessings of heaven. Each and every time I have someone serve me, I pray that HF will help them in their life, in the struggles they are going through that He will see their acts of kindness and provide for them in their time of need. I think the one particular line can be drawn is whether we expect the service or whether we are grateful for whatever anyone is willing to do. Expectation of being served is extremely self-centered and IMO un-Christlike. We should be looking for how we can serve others rather than an expectation of others being at our beck and call. An expectation of being served will develop a sense of ungratefulness that when someone is unable to serve we will develop an attitude. Part of the issue, might be (and I'm reading between the lines-never a good thing), is that you hope your son would be doing some of these same things. I do not know the age of your son, but only you can determine whether he is contributing adequately to compensate for the generous gift of living at home.

If he is volunteering and you trust that he can do the work correctly, then let him. Sounds like he wants to do some service for you as your home teacher.

In my opinion, we have been blessed with certain faculties for a purpose which is to prayerfully study, analyze, dissect if necessary and come to our own conclusions after much analysis and prayer. It is a combination of both, study and faith. When we talk about Mormon intellectuals (generally speaking) we seem to assume that the persons in this group only believe what sciences such as Psychology, Sociology or Philosophy has to say about certain issues and they disregard completely the Scriptures. It is not so. Real intellectuals use a combination of both. The article is very generic. Overemphasizing the importance of personal revelation? One can say that those against Mormon Intellectualism overemphasize that once a General Authority has spoken, the discussion is over and we shouldn't question at all their words. Overemphasizing the importance of "Thus said the Lord"? One can say that those against Mormon Intellectualism overemphasize that once a General Authority has spoken, he speaks for the Lord. Overemphasizing the importance of Church history? One can say that those against Mormon Intellectualism overemphasize that when you are studying certain topics about Church history, you are given a warning that you are in the road towards Apostasy because of course, you cannot be a good member in good standing and study the good and the ugly in Church history. The best part is when you discuss a certain topic in Church history and you are given raised eyebrows and suspicious looks and someone asks: Have you been reading Anti-Mormon literature? Overemphasizing the fallibility of Prophets? One can say that reminding ourselves the responsibility to pray and seek confirmation from the Holy Spirit after hearing the words of the Prophet it is vital to our eternal/spiritual journey. In conclusion, I believe we can achieve a balance in both. One OR the other isn't a solution. One OR the other does not demonstrate "greater" faith or "greater" understanding. We aren't a cult, we are Christ's Church.

Is this ex-Maxel? Welcome back!

I don't think there's an age when you have to cut it. I do think there might be age limits (you aren't there yet, OP) on color options. I am pretty traditional about women's hair. I see these older women (who are probably my age, they just look old) with gray hair cut short like a guy's. And no, they aren't gay, these are (I assume) married women walking around Walmart with their husbands. I don't understand why a woman would want such an unflattering, unfeminine cut. Since I was a young widow and didn't have the luxury of time to make me sick of my husband : ), maybe I still hold romantic illusions about being attractive to my man. You'd think the husbands would say something. I'm not against short hair; there are cute short pixie cuts that look feminine. I'm taking about a woman who looks like she got the $5 hair cut at a barbershop. /rant

Just a note about prayer and studying the Book of Mormon, Science or for that matter anything else. I like to begin any study with a prayer and discuss with G-d my intension, purpose and intended or expected results. But I add a caveat that I be guided by the spirit to discover new things and led to better understanding. At the end of my endeavor I pray again reporting what I learned and achieved so far and ask G-d to accept my efforts and if necessary bring to my attention what I missed or what he would have me understand. I also promise G-d to go where ever he would have me go and do what he would have me do. If I am to change direction – he needs to make clear to me what new direction he would have me go. I believe that I have learned many truths from those of other religions but I have received confirmation that just as there is only one true and living G-d – that there is only one true and living church. Concerning studies in Science – I have received confirmation that there is much truth in science and that when we understand religion and science we will realize that there is no conflict in thruth.

Charlie Daniels

I do not disagree with the spiritual disciplines. They are vital to long-term health. Sometimes though God desires to lead us by the still waters--to give us rest. The living water is Christ himself. It is the Spirit. He is our strength and our victory. Maybe another way of putting it is this: 1. To the 80% who do only 20% of the work, get up, get going, nose to the grind stone...be about the Father's business! 2. To the 20% who do 80% of the work, be still and know God's glory. Let him carry you and restore your strength and vitality.

I think modesty is attitude as well.

Whenever I read these discussions anymore or whenever I hear the lesson at church and the talk about the lesson afterwards I have reminded of the following: Luke 8:5-8 5 A sower went out to sow his seed: and as he sowed, some fell by the way side; and it was trodden down, and the fowls of the air devoured it. 6 And some fell upon a rock; and as soon as it was sprung up, it withered away, because it lacked moisture. 7 And some fell among thorns; and the thorns sprang up with it, and choked it. 8 And other fell on good ground, and sprang up, and bare fruit an hundredfold. And when he had said these things, he cried, He that hath ears to hear, let him hear. So often we (me included) hear something taught that hits home in my heart. Instead of saying how can this apply to me I get defensive. We all do sometimes. Then instead of stopping and saying "how can I make it easier for my brothers" I hear and read threads like this.

Amen Iggy, and amen Prisonchaplain. To paraphrase C.S. Lewis, the Saviors way is difficult, he wants us to give him everything. He does not want a part of "our" time and "our" money, he wants it all. And when we give are all we will get his all, who is the greatest of all. While his way is difficult our way is impossible. We want to give up those things that are bad but at the end of the day are still hoping that our natural man will still have some time to do what it wants. When we are neither hot nor cold we find the christian way very difficult. We end up very unhappy indeed because we begrudge giving up every moment of ourselves. However, what we can't do, what we must not do, is to work harder but still try to cling to the self. Instead, we have to humble ourselves before the Lord, acknowledge that we cannot do it and ask for a new heart. Ask, ask, ask. When our heart is broken and we our sincere we will find that we want to follow him. We have been changed! The natural man is still there but he has much less sway over our hearts. Then the living water infuses out life and we can drink deeply. I am so satisfied with this gospel life. I feel like I want to give my joy to everyone. The waves foll and the thunder peals but deep down the spirit of the Lord is supporting me. What of the waves? What of the thunder? Let them rage on if they will, I have something much more firm, and more abiding, the rock of our Redeemer. He will lift me up at the last day and all this will seem as but a moment. This is what the gospel offers. If you have not found it then you are still on the outside, even if you have been a member your whole life! (This sounds sort of preachy, but it's the truth. How can I say otherwise?)

Have you considered befrending this person and having some personal discussions?

Even when it is, we come to find out that artificial turf offers no sustenance. :-) Where we sometimes err is in thinking that if we just add more water to the lawn then we'll feel better. Sometimes we need to stop watering, sit down, and enjoy some lemonaid. How might that look for us? Well, maybe instead of one more visitation, or one more task, what we need is to sit down, put on some inspirational music, and allow the peace, rest and comfort of our Master to soothe our weary souls.

Prison Chaplain, I thought you were talking about my backyard at first. The LORD wants all to follow Him. He called Matthew, a Roman tax collector, to follow Him and be one of His Apostles. Rather than stoning an adulteress woman, Jesus told her to: "Go and sin no more." The Prophet Joseph Smith wrote: "And the woman glorified God from that hour, and believed on his name." (See the Inspired Version of the Bible, chapter 8, verse 11.) Isaiah wrote: "Ho, every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters, and he that hath no money; come ye, buy, and eat; yea, come, buy wine and milk without money and without price." - Isaiah 55:1

I understand the reasoning here, because it's precisely the rationale conservatives and libertarians have warned about for half a century: government involvement is government control. On the other hand, I don't think that's necessarily a good thing. Corporate law was never intended as means by which government could control the day-to-day activities of a business enterprise. Rather, it arose because society decided that it was in the best interests of the economy generally to incentivize risk-taking by giving individual business owners some measure of fiscal immunity should their enterprises fail or otherwise be saddled with financial liabilities that cannot be met. Under your thesis--which I understand to be that offering or denying any government benefit, regardless of that benefit's original purpose, is an acceptable means of incentivizing behavior that the majority deems as desirable--then there's nothing preventing a future Republican president from denying welfare benefits to voters who refuse to end their affiliation with the Democratic Party. ("They're still free to vote how they want--but why should we subsidize that kind of behavior?") There's nothing to prevent a conservative Christian mayor from instructing his police and fire chiefs not to respond to any calls from a local women's clinic that happens to provide abortions ("They are still free to perform whatever procedures they want; but I'm not putting my guys' lives and taxpayer dollars on the line to defend those reprobates.") And there's nothing preventing Congress or a state legislature from denying the Church its corporate status and/or ability to own property, or denying passports/visas to LDS missionaries, if the Church refuses to stop teaching the sinfulness of gay sex. ("They can still say whatever they want; but we're not going to facilitate it') I know you'd never intentionally do this; but if I understand your position correctly--your argument basically becomes an intellectual foundation for majority-rule totalitarianism. Over the past decade we have seen a truly remarkable pivot from "I'm in the minority--you can't make me do that!" to "You're in the minority--you''d better do as you're told if you want to work, own a business, or find any other means of feeding your family and keeping them off the street!". No, MoE. Individuals have a God-given right to provide for themselves and their families without passing a political or ideological litmus test; and a government that seriously tries to abridge that right is going to be seen as illegitimate by the individuals whose rights are so abridged. This reasoning seems to say that one's tax revenues being used to partially fund a reprehensible objective makes one just as morally culpable as if one had fully funded that reprehensible objective. Under that all-or-nothing logic, wouldn't it be fair to say that you (as a taxpayer) are just as guilty for the horrors of the Iraq war as you would have been if you, personally, had bankrolled the whole thing? And the idea of government telling an individual (or group of individuals) "your moral code is inconsistent, so we will prevent you from living it at all--or, if you choose to live it, condemn you to a life of poverty by denying you some of the essential benefits of the American free enterprise system and bar you from working in certain key professions" should scare the beejeebies out of anyone.

Personally, I'm extatic over this! Been following this from the beginning as there are many Catholic organizations and dioceses also filing suits against the HHS Mandate. This inspires confidence. It should have been a 9-0 decision, but I'm glad the right side won. Just thought I should mention, EWTN (the largest Catholic channel in the country, and one of the best Christian channels) lost their suit against the HHS Mandate and are hoping to get an appeal. Though if they lose the appeal they'll have to cut staff, pay a fine, or shut down. All of those possibilities are sad and would be a loss in terms of Christian media. So the battle is not done yet! Keep on praying!

Bing004 I am sorry to hear about this trouble you and your husband are having. I have a firm testimony that the Saviour wants you to be happy and is there to support you. I'd like to shift the focus of the discussion a little and hope you find it helpful. The way I see it there are a few things here for you to deal with. Men like to feel attractive, wanted, and needed just like women do. It is likely that your husband being upset is coming from a place of not feeling as valued as he did before, he is no longer perceiving himself as being needed to complete you. I also want to make it clear that this is not unique to same sex attraction. If I were to let my wife know that I am more attracted to other women than her it would be a devastating blow as would the inverse be on me. Sadly this kind of thing can develop a lot of the time as couples age and physical appearance diminishes and waistlines grow. Of note is the fact that there is more to a lasting relationship than physical attraction. What other qualities does your husband embody that you fell in love with in the first place? Focus on things like that and let him know. Make sure he feels loved and needed and respected. Also be sure to let him know you need the same in return. Do not allow your temptations to define you and your relationship.