Leaderboard

You are asking for opinions so you are going to get lots of opinions... But those opinions are by their very nature based on what the opinion giver thinks and feels, and reasons... They can be good for helping you consider things in ways you haven't before. But the only opinion that really matter, the only opinion you should seek to follow... Is Christ's. Get on your knees and pray... Wrestle with it if necessary. When you believe God approves of your choice then act on it whatever it might be.

I say go and be in his wedding. It doesn't mean you are condoning his lifestyle but being a friend. I have a son who is gay and in a relationship. I've had a really hard time coming to terms with this in how I can still show my son I love him and still support him but also stand by my beliefs. I have discovered I can still do both.

I heartily endorse Estradling's suggestion to follow the Spirit. That said: I would be suspicious of anyone who suggested that I ought to go as a matter of "tolerance". Would you consider yourself morally required to attend the wedding and serve as best man, if your friend were marrying a thirteen-year-old girl rather than a male? Of course not. You might well choose to attend and participate, I suppose; but it would be a churlish friend indeed who, understanding your own conflicting values, demanded it. Again--I'm not saying, positively, that you shouldn't go. I just think you should maybe be a little wary of the societal pressures suggesting that you should. Like Estradling says--wrestle it out with the Lord and have the courage to do what the Spirit tells you to do.

Michelle Obama's mother was just re-quoted on her comments about not liking that her daughter would marry someone of mixed race. People surfaced the quote with the hope of raising some controversy. Myself, I understood her concerns and wouldn't criticize her for them. Marrying someone from a different backgound makes a marriage more difficult. Not impossible, just more difficult.

I agree that things have been clarified. But of course Facebook posts can count. Example of not teaching false doctrine on Facebook: "I think guys should be able to marry guys." Example of teaching false doctrine on Facebook: "I'm a Mormon, and the church is wrong about this one. Joseph Smith had no problem with gays marrying."

This is one of those fun places where extreme gay/transgender rights and extreme feminism clash. One the one hand, you've got the former group saying that their constituents have an absolute right to use the girls' bathroom. On the other hand, the latter group is saying "I don't care what she calls herself now--she WAS a man, and all men are rapists!!!!!" For us conservatives, it's a nice time to sit back and watch the fireworks. In a more constructive vein: Even LDS Churches have "unisex" bathrooms--they're just designed for use by one person at a time. I think that's ultimately the direction that public schools, and places of public accommodation generally, are going to have to take.

With all due respect, there are also real pedophiles you know. They really do exist. They are real people. I've met them, I've worked with them, I've wept and prayed with them. The point is not that people who are attracted to people of the same gender--or to adolescents--are less human than anyone else. It is that they are just as human as anyone else--but we still aren't "bigoted" or "intolerant" or "bad friends" if we refuse to support those of their actions we consider to be morally reprehensible.

I believe there is one other dimension. Various mental disorders can be a source of contention. My late mother-in-law had a bipolar problem and at times she was so contentious that I could not deal with her except to completely ignore and not respond at all to anything she was saying or doing. This was especially difficult when my children or grandchildren were involved. Sadly the last few days before her passing was the only really pleasant experience I had with her as her personality completely changed and she became so sweet it brought me to tears.

Which way do you face?

I have a close family member that worked in church security for decades. I can tell you that the church monitors temple security and missionary security very closely. Everything from chapel break-ins are reported pretty far up the chain. My family member would meet with the FBI when needed. I cannot guarantee, but would imagine that items like terrorists and other threats of the like have already been discussed. The church is all about preparedness.

Contention is when you disagree with me and decide to kick against the pricks instead of accepting my grand and irrefutable wisdom. *glares at TFP*

I don't actually care if you agree with me or not - quite honestly. 'Say what you wanna say, yeah' as the song goes. I will clarify my comment to Jane, since you decided to comment on it. What I didn't express terribly well, was that people (especially those from relatively sheltered backgrounds) do find it hard to know what to say if I ever reveal my childhood experiences to them. For this reason, I don't talk about it much. I am ok with that discomfort, I get it, I understand it - and I'm also ok if anyone wants to tell me what they think. What I meant when I said that most people 'can't relate or have an opinion on' my experience, was that most people feel uncomfortable and don't know what to say - not that I don't think they can have an opinion. The wording came out wrong. Some people are also quite the opposite, they are interested and curious, and empathetic and loving. Either way I'm ok with what anyone has to say to me. The only reason I brought it up my experience on this thread was because of the comments I was reading that were directed to our sister here who has suffered hurt feelings from those who consider just the 99, to the exclusion of the one. For me, caring about 'the one' is a tenet of basic human kindness, of showing Christlike love and 'mourning with those who stand in need of comfort'.

I grew up in a very contentious home. I think a little contention is inevitable since we are imperfect people. Resisting the natural man is a life long battle, and we will fall sometimes. I think the degree of contention in the home can be a gauge. It can serve as a yellow or red flag for specific problems that need to be addressed. I know contention in the home is not a good thing. The less contention, the better. The spirit will not stick around with contention, but it can come back :)

Years ago I typed a copy of mine, so I would have a second copy. It was my second copy that I would pull out and read. That way my original stayed in good shape. And, this past year I scanned the original and now have it stored in my computer. The digital copy, I'm thinking of sending it to me in an email, so I can have access to read it even on my iphone.

I did exactly that many years ago. I made sure that in my re-typing, I included not just the text of the blessing but also the name of the Patriarch who gave it, then date it was given, and the reference number, in the top right corner. These days, you can just order a copy of your blessing online through the church website.

People have said much more objectionable things than that, even among the higher echelons of church leadership. Putting aside my personal feelings on the matter, the objective statistical evidence is clear that relationships that cross cultural boundaries are more prone to failure. This is largely due to differing expectations about communication. And it is true when those cultural boundaries are racial, geographic, religious, political.....the list could go on forever. People who have similar backgrounds have a more natural understanding of each other and their communicative patterns. That make it much easier to resolve conflicts. The other source of conflict in cross-cultural relationships tends to deal with values. This is usually more starkly seen in the religious context, but can be true in racial contexts. So, while I'm not a big fan of this quote, I'm not particularly bothered by it. There is some objective value to it when discussed properly. But every time I've been in a position where it's come up, I've either ignored it or pivoted to talking about communication issues.

At the risk of injecting myself into a messy conversation and the fact that I do not have a lot of time right now to response . . . here goes. Char, 1st off let me say that I have no idea the pain, suffering and anguish you are going through and to be quite honest even those who struggle with the same issue don't fully understand. And that is okay. One does not need to feel your pain, exactly like you do to provide wise guidance or counsel. The absolute beauty of the Gospel is in the healing power of the Atonement. I would counsel that instead of focusing outward on what other people say or do, or even what the Church does or says as a group that you focus on the absolute marvelous Healing power of the Atonement for you. The Atonement covers so much more than sin; Christ descended below all things and suffered greater than you or I specifically so He would know exactly what it feels like when we go through our trails. He is the only Being who has ever lived on this Earth that understand perfectly what you are going through. Do not go down the bitter path of being angry, upset at the world for every perceived slight that brings to remembrance your pain. Rely upon the merits and grace of Jesus Christ to Heal you. If you let Him, He will guide you to the path and to the individuals who will be able to help you overcome these struggles. If you let Him, you will be able to get to the point where infertility will not sting you like an open wound. However, it is your choice to allow Him to work His miracle in your life. You can continue down the current path of extreme sadness and (from what I have read and detect) bitterness and anger, or you can give this struggle over to Him. We don't know why some of us are faced with the challenges given . . .why in the prime of life did my wife get Stage IV cancer come within an inch of dying and have any future children gone. . .why are you infertile . . . why are some children fatherless, why do some face the challenges of depression . . .etc? The why doesn't really matter, it is how we respond that matters. Do we choose to be overcome with bitterness, sadness, anger, etc. that it clouds our minds to rob us of the joy and happiness that God wants for us? Do we become angry, bitter at God? Do we curse God and hope to die? Or do we turn our life over to Him, humble submit to His will and simply say "If it be possible let this bitter cup pass, nevertheless not as I will by as thine". I personally throughout my life have experienced all and I have to say that while it is okay to let ourselves feel the full range of emotions . . . .but being angry, bitter or overcome with sadness doesn't really do any good. It stops us, literally damning us by preventing us from Seeing God's miracles in our lives. From seeing that He weeps with us, the rain is His tears, that He is always trying to help us Listen to Him to allow Him to work mighty miracles. If we endure well our trials and sufferings, He will exalt us on high . . . and it isn't even in the future. We can learn how to Hear His voice in our lives. It is the refiners fire of life. I personally have endured much . . . but I know there are those who have and who will endure more. I only hope that I can endure my trials well enough that I will do God's will on this earth and that other's might see through me Christ's love. And regardless of my pain, I want others to feel as much happiness in this life as possible; while there are things that I will not have the opportunity to have, I will take joy in other's joy. One of my favorite lds videos-he could have tried to suck the joy out of others, but he didn't:

To me, this simply sounds like an updated version of the Lord's instructions to the ancient Israelites that they not intermarry with the people in surrounding territories. This morning I listened to an interesting and informed radio broadcast of a discussion about marriages between people of different cultures. The person being interviewed is in the final stages of completing her research which focussed on intercultural marriages, for which she interviewed 44 people. There was also some excellent phone-in listener contributions from the audience. It’s a good insight into, and discussion of, some of the issues that can arise with interracial marriages. The segment goes for about 20 minutes or thereabouts. It can be listened to at http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/lifematters/the-impact-of-moving-overseas-for-love/6332456. ps I note that in the quote above, President Kimball didn’t say we had to marry someone of the same sex........... but I guess that went without saying back them. pps and the fact that he didn't have to say it back then, but that it might need to be said now, or in 20 years time, would be an example of how counsel on marriage may need to change from time to time.

Have you talked to him specifically about how you feel like he'd benefit from the occasional friends/guys night out? If he doesn't want to get out and about and it's not causing any problems (or stemming from them) I'd be inclined to just let him know that you're happy to support him if and/or when he gets an itch for a monthly (or what have you) evening of X with friends. If he's an introvert* then over encouraging him to get out there and jump in with friends where relationship dynamics may have changed significantly may make him feel pressured and a bit grumpy. *That he had friends and went out regularly doesn't necessarily mean he's an extrovert. However, you know your husband better than anyone else here on the board.

You are quite right, there are some terrible things happening to the Palestinians. I've heard about it from some native palestinians themselves. I've also heard about the horrible things that are happening to Israel from some jews. I don't think this issue is completely black and white.

You were calling both mine and Leah's examples silly and extreme. What I am saying is, examples (in general) are okay, even if other people think they are silly, extreme, or whatnot.

How else would you show the principle I was trying to show? I respect your opinion about Jesus being best man at a gay wedding. I'm strongly inclined to disagree. Maybe I'm wrong, or maybe there's an exceptional circumstance in which He would do it - but my point of view is based on the idea that you can show love for someone without participating in what they are doing. Objectively speaking, I certainly don't think it's a slam-dunk conclusion that Jesus "for sure" would be his best man.

Which is how it should have been for the last hundred years. From the French pissoirs to my own junior high and high school (and BYU) experiences in the men's locker room, intrinsic modesty has not been valued or promoted. It's about time.

TFP, I think it's all in the phrasing. I do take a hard-line position on immigration based, not on what I deem to be "moral", but what might be termed "political expediency"--I think it's in the national interest to preserve a distinctly "American" culture and to not have an immigration system that gives preference to those who disregard the law. On the other hand, the Church might well say that it's immoral to break up families, or to uproot them and send them back to the parents' nation of origin.

But if someone has actually sought an answer from our Heavenly Father, why are they asking strangers on the Internet? I suspect that a lot of the time people post these kinds of questions is because they are seeking validation of a decision they have already made. As though some stranger on the Internet giving their approval automatically makes it okay...whatever "it" is. Because you are guaranteed - no matter what the question or the church's teaching - you are going to find someone that says it is okay. If the decision has been made, why not turn to the Lord for confirmation instead of the Internet? I think that being in the wedding party of a gay wedding is a whole other level of support as opposed to being a guest. And that is all I am going to say about that as I don't really care to engage in the condemnation from members of the church who would call me bigoted or un-Christlike. It's getting to be more and more that members of the church are no different from the rest of the world in being intolerant of those who have a more conservative or different viewpoint than theirs....even when those viewpoints are in line with the Gospel, with church teachings, or the guidance of our prophets and leaders.

Is it really naive to assume that a person may not have prayed or prayed enough? I think it would be naive to assume that a person that we don't know HAS prayed and studied the scriptures... We don't live in a world that tends to put much value on prayer or the scriptures... Hopefully anyone with questions HAS prayed and studied... but I doubt that is even a given with many people who profess to know Christ... And recommending prayer and scripture study is still good advice even if someone already has done some praying and studying... As for the third thing "listen to the Spirit" ... that's why we do the other two when we have a questions that arise in life.. otherwise we might not be able to hear and understand what the Spirit is saying to us... For myself, I know that I need this advice all the time... Of course I do know already that I'm supposed to pray and study things out and listen for the Spirit to whisper... But do I really put all my heart into my study and prayers? Or could I do a little better.. maybe with a little more practice and effort... If I'm supposed to be studying, praying and receiving clear answers all the time then I KNOW that I still have quite a bit of improving to do ...

It is an invalid argument when comparing gay marriage to pedophilia or other depraved acts. There are real homosexuals you know. They do really exist. They are real people. In this case, the OP is talking about his BEST friend. Someone they know well now getting married. Not some pervert asking for a certificate of debauchery. You can argue against the homosexual act. You can a argue against homosexual political activism. But you cannot deny a person being a person. This thread quickly repeated the last. It isn't good enough to tell someone they need to "pray", "read the scriptures", "listen to the Spirit". Those answers may be just as valid as they are in Sunday School but it is naive to assume the person has somehow fallen short in having already sought that path.

My personal feeling is that participating in a gay wedding is...in fact....participating in a gay wedding. To draw a parallel, if your best friend wants you to play a piviotal role in some debauched frat party in his honor, do you do it just because he's your best friend? If your best friend is part of some racist organization and he's getting an award from it, and he wants you to present it to him because "it means a lot" to him, do you do it? This is not to demonize him for being gay. I think homosexuaity is a pretty human experience, and so the parallels aren't going to be totally exact. But would Jesus be the best man at a gay wedding? Or Thomas Monson? Honest, open question I'm postulating, I realize some of you may have different answers, but it's something to think about. If he was my very best friend, I might go to his wedding, but I would not participate in the wedding itself by being best man. Just a guess, but it seems to me that by asking you to be best man, your friend is trying to strong-arm you into showing acceptance for what he is doing. We've seen a lot of strong-arming into acceptance from the gay community lately, haven't we? Seems they think that is acceptable. It's not. If your best friend is really your best friend, he'll understand where you're coming from and settle with you attending the wedding and giving your regards to them by wishing them a measure of some kind of happiness in this life, instead of knowingly making you participate in something that is blatantly against your most cherished principles. Best friend? Sure. Trick-monkey? No. I'd tell him I appreciate the honor of the offer, but cannot do it due to my principles, but I'll see him at the wedding.

On a more serious note.... To avoid contention does *not* mean to avoid disagreeing on things. We can disagree on things, talk about them, and still be filled with charity. I think that such is very Christ-like. I see contention being a completely separate thing from agree/disagreeing about a topic. After all, I've seen plenty of people get in the most bitter angry fights about a topic that both parties completely agree on....

Can I be issued a temple recommend if I am an illegal? the answer is yes, and I don't have a problem with it but many might

We just finished a thread very similar to this question. There was a great debate with arguments pro and con. It went on for pages and pages. My feelings, you do a greater dis-service to the gospel by showing intolerrance to someone so close to you. A demonstration of love (your love) is a far greater teacher than your absence. To not be there only tells the person they are of no value.

Excuse me. That's a caricature. My hump is not that large!

You haven't upset me at all - I simply disagreed with the self-congratulatory comment about how great it is for YOUR kids to feel happy to sing any Primary song. That's great for them. But let's not forget about the others who aren't so lucky. On reflection I don't think that you intended for your comments to come across that way, and I'm sorry too for the sarcastic response.

Here is the link to request a copy: https://apps.lds.org/pbrequest/open/signin-choice?lang=eng

if something is felt important enough to do so they'll pull missionaries from an area. If it's not quite that important they'll advise the mission president and it will be his responsibility to figure out how they should operate in an area that's deemed risky. Otherwise its up to the mission president to watch and be receptive to inspiration. But also too its up to the missionary to also be watchful and receptive. I think tho that a lot is just that God knows how to work his church and knows when and where people will be and that affects when and where people get called too. I've tracted areas in Detroit where people said i was crazy stupid to be there (and also said that even the police don't get out of their cars there and don't come around once it gets dark). been near a few shootings and even a store robbery (slight chance that I might have even been on TV even)…. but always it wasn't an issue because we were somewhere else right when the dangerous stuff happened. Ya the church has members that have been with FBI, CIA, or even criminal organizations before they converted.

SALT LAKE CITY — LDS Charities of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints gave a $1.8 million donation to the American Red Cross Thursday from the proceeds of “Meet the Mormons,” a film the Church released last October. Gary E. Stevenson, the Church’s presiding bishop, presented the check to Cliff Holtz, president of Humanitarian Services of the American Red Cross, at an event in Salt Lake City. http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/church-gives-meet-the-mormons-proceeds-to-the-american-red-cross

Let's put the shoe on the other foot, though: The LDS Church's position on illegal immigration to the US is, frankly, probably a lot softer than a lot of us (as conservatives) would like for it to be. Do we feel comfortable expressing our hard-line positions on immigration via social media, in spite of the fact that they might not align with the church's political position? Should we?

No, no, no, carlimac. It's not that we believe having an affair is good. Rather, we simply want to support our loved ones in their extramarital affairs, and hope they will find great joy and fulfillment in their adulteries. Same with gambling; it's not that the gambling is good, per se, but when people have made the decision to gamble away their life savings, we need to be able to extend our approval and show them through our actions that we have no problem whatsoever with their decision.

OK, so it's safe to say, " I approve of gay marriage" on facebook. Now I just wonder what the motivation is, as a Latter Day Saint, to want to make that public statement. I have relatives that do but they are mostly "Millenials" who enjoy the shock value of showing of their liberalism. They are also the ones more likely to use profanity on facebook. I believe they don't care what others think of them. They are closer to the fringe than they care to admit. I have a gay friend, no longer in the church at all who of course is very pro-gay marriage. He's "married" to his...friend...whatever. And his family, mostly active LDS are pro-gay marriage, too. At least pro- HIS marriage. I suppose that approval carries over to his friends and associates who are also gay. But I wonder if they think it's OK beyond their acquaintances. Do they really believe this is what's best for society? I can understand why my friends who aren't religious put up that marriage equality sign. But my curiosity, (which always gets me in trouble) makes me wonder what point any LDS person is trying to make by being boldly pro-gay marriage in public.

I'm going to confess to not being a big student of the ins and outs of the Israeli/Palestinian/Arab conflict. However, one side is launching bombs and suicide bombers against civilian targets. One side has all the surrounding countries clamoring for genocide against Jews. When a country is under siege by enemies that surround it on all sides, and by an enemy within, then we might hold them to a different standard than we would say our own troops operating in foreign lands. http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/4695/hamas-terror-tunnels

The Church does have a security division that monitors global threats--an ex-ward member of mine used to work for them. But I think it's more of an analyze-publicly-available-news type of thing; no cloak and dagger stuff. And I don't think it's the Church's style to put out major threat alerts--more likely, they just quietly tell the mission presidents "hey--make sure your missionaries don't go to this spot".

I notice that the url posted by Pam ends in lone - pam and it is immediately followed by a reply from a rider and a picture of a horse. Makes me think of a man who used to ride a horse called Silver.

I haven't read 50 Shades - I know it has extended sex scenes in it, but I also know it's not quite the same "literature" as in actual Erotica, which is usually about (give or take) 90% depictions of very lurid, graphic, detailed sex in written form and maybe 10% set up to the sex. 50 Shades seems to be sort of border-line as a genre, trying to be in the realm of an actual fiction novel, you know, with focus on character development and such, but with a fair amount of sex as well, interspersed. I think there's also a difference between writing a sex sene in a novel to depict the experience of the character as a human experience (the entire point of literature in the first place) and writing a sex scene to try and get the reader off. However, it's certainly feasible that the author of 50 Shades may have been trying to do a little of both. I'm not sure I consider 50 Shades to be "porn" in the sense that the erotica genre is porn in written word. There's a novel by Paulo Coehlo (author of The Alchemist) called Eleven Minutes, which is about a Brazillian prostitute and her sexual/spiritual journey in life. It has a number of graphic scenes in it - but I don't consider it porn, because the purpose is to show an honest portrayal of this woman's experiences and how they affected her in who she becomes by the end of the story. There are times in the novel where the character is indeed degraded, but it fulfills the author's purpose to show that she was in a degrading situation. It doesn't try and dress it up in a pornographic way that says "degredation is good." I understand that 50 Shades deals with BDSM themes. For some people, that's very taboo and a lot of people have a closed mind toward BDSM and believe it is degrading under any circumstance. I disagree. BDSM, on face value, is a form of sex, and any sex can be degrading or uplifting depending on how it is used, how the other person feels about it, etc, etc. The actions themselves are not the degrading factor so much as the intent, purpose and reception of those actions. There are a lot of sexual things that people do that one couple would not like and feel degraded by, but another couple would like very much and it would bring them much closer together. So, I know I called 50 Shades "mommy porn," but the reason I called it that was because, like romance novels, a lot of women like to read them because of the romantic and sometimes sexual elements. I'm saying that the intention of the author (whatever it may have been) is irrelevenat to how the book is being read and what it is being used for - and a lot of mommies have apparently been reading 50 Shades for its reputation of sexual content. How someone is reading or using something doesn't make it, of itself, porn - but it makes it porn for the person who is making it porn for themselves. My guess is that the author off 50 Shades did indeed write many, if not all of the scenes, to be sexually arousing and interesting, but I also guess that she probably wrote them to serve the purpose of her over-arching story as well. So I feel it might be a bit too easy and too simple to actually try and label the book "porn," or to try and place it fully in the erotica genre, because there is a story there besides the sex, but one isn't wrong for also pointing out that there is a lot of sex and eroticism in the novel, and that people are getting off on it, and that the author likely intended for those scenes to be an enticing part of the story. Whether or not reading any sexual content in any type of novel, and being aroused by it, is degrading or, in all cases, inherently sinful, is a deeper discussion. I see where it can be, and I see where it could desensitive one to the Spirit, but I'm open to other possibilities as well, as outrageous as that will sound to some.

I don't find anything terribly objectionable about the quote. Even within the US, there is often a "subculture" that accompanies each particular race; and marriages across such cultural norms can create tensions that may make marriage more difficult--as no less a figure than Michelle Obama's mother understood when she realized her daughter was marrying someone who was half white. “I guess that I worry about races mixing because of the difficulty — not for, so much for prejudice or anything,” Robinson continued. “It’s just very hard.”

First a preamble: My wife and I are going on 18 years of infertility, above-and-beyond fertility treatments, and tens of thousands upon thousands of wasted dollars in pursuit of this matter. anatess, just FYI, as for the infertility thing, there ain't many out there who can hold a candle to me and my wife's level of infertility, and I still consider you a friend and wasn't offending in the least by anything you've said. If one can't have children, adopt. If one can't adopt either, then trust the Lord. He'll bless you with family as He has promised if you are faithful. There's nothing offensive in these ideas. How is it condescending? Do you doubt that you are meant to be a mother if you only remain true and suffer through this mortal probation, the same as we all must? Is it not your eternal destiny? Waiting patiently and faithfully on the Lord's timing is the answer, is it not? I expect (and I admit I'm reading into this a bit) that your sense of persecution on this is your own, and not reality. My wife and I have never been "persecuted". Whereas people do say insensitive things, my job is to forgive and forget and understand. It's our burden to bear, and to turn that burden into accusations and bitterness would harm only us. Even mothers hate Mother's Day meetings. Apparently they're offensive to everyone. But not necessary in this life. This is extreme and outside the reality of what's been said. Hurt feelings happen with any issues with which we suffer. The contention isn't that those hurt feelings don't count. It's whether they count more or less than the core teachings and focus of the church. It is my perspective that I ought to be willing to suffer hurt feelings to uphold these core important teachings. I don't believe it is proper for the church or even the culture to back off on expressing the importance of family because some of us cannot have them. The reality, char713, is that it is not the church's or the culture's responsibility to change because you are suffering. It is your responsibility to change. And that is true for every person who ever lives. It is our own responsibility to humble ourselves and to forgive and forget, to love and to serve, and to trust in the Lord and His kingdom and methods implicitly. God will take care of His church. Your job, as with all of us, is to forget yourself and go to work. And that is the only answer. Your agency, your salvation, your eternal reward, is up to you and you alone. People can be insensitive. People ARE insensitive. In response, we should smile, love, and serve them more. Focusing inwardly, being centered on self and individual trials and hurt is not what we are called to do. Judging other's instead of working to improve ourselves is exactly the wrong response to trials. Whatever trials we happen to face, we get up and we lift where we stand to the best of our ability, and we love others and do our best to uplift and help them. That is OUR responsibility individual, and we have no right to judge other's based on our interpretation of their failures. You are tending towards severe over-sensitivity. I suggest you stop worrying about others mourning with you and worry more about mourning with others -- and not just those who share in the same trial you do. There now. Does that earn me the right to the accusatory statements made about me in this thread?

When I was little, I knew a monster. He was a serial sexual abuser whom, had his crimes been discovered, would have easily qualified for life in prison. He hurt me and people I loved. I didn't understand what was happening, only that things felt bad, and I was told to keep this a secret. So I kept it a secret for over 20 years. And that was a mistake. Abuse hurts: it's a disease which can so easily spread from one person to another. I fought it alone, and sometimes I won, but frequently I lost. I feared others knowing my secret more death. But there was no reason for such fear, other than to let the abuse continue. There was no reason for me to be alone. When I finally let people in to see me as I am, the beauty was amazing. Beauty-- that's what I found inside of me and inside of others. I found strength, I found courage, I found love-- I found my Savior. I know *personally* how powerful the Savior's healing is, how great his mercy and justice are. Such are the foundation of my testimony: it's my light to share with the world. You don't have to be afraid, you don't have to be ashamed. I no longer am.

I find that people tend to put way too much into whether one technically qualifies for a temple recommend or not, and whether one technically qualifies for excommunication or not -- as if these things are the key measurements of our standing before God and how we're doing on the path to salvation. Just because the church won't kick you out for something and/or you can hold a temple recommend for something does not mean it's righteous or wise.

Don't expect her to change. Really, don't. She might be playing along for a moment- heck, maybe she really IS trying to be different, but it will always go back to square one unless she get some serious counseling. I also have to agree you may be suffering from co-dependency. I was engaged to a man who didn't treat me well, but I made excuses for him because "I loved him", and hoped he would change overtime, thinking that maybe I needed to fix myself- that maybe I was the one causing him to be that way. It was when my best friend sat down with me and talked to me about co-dependency my eyes opened up and I was able to leave. Thankfully we were not married. The way she treats you is absolutely unacceptable. She is abusing you. You are NOT the reason why she is doing this. This is her own problem she needs to work through. Sure, a marriage isn't perfect, and you will always have your flaws, but there is NO excuse for her behavior. I know my husband would have flown out that door from the start had I treated him the way she treats you. I understand she's your wife. You love her. You cling onto hope. You envision the future to be bright with her changed and being a good mom. You see yourselves past all of this and thinking it was just a phase. But I promise you, it will NOT go away on its own. I also recommend she get a hormone panel (it's just a simple blood test). I too had emotional outbursts (not quite as severe as your wife), only to find out later my hormones were way off. As soon as I started getting treated for them to get back on track, things changed for me. How is she taking care of herself? Does she have weight issues? Does she exercise? Eat well? Anyway, stop blaming yourself. Her behavior is not okay. One more piece of advice: Do not demand respect. Don't point your finger at her, don't raise your voice at her, and don't get superior with her when she talks down to you. You're not "bigger" than her. Remain calm, or walk away if you are unable to do so. Go for a drive if she follows you around. Tell her you don't appreciate the way you're being talked to, and you'll be willing to talk when you've both cooled off. If she throws a tantrum, so be it. If she breaks your items, go somewhere else for the night- or the next few days. Don't tolerate that behavior, and don't give in if she apologizes and begs for forgiveness. Stand your ground. Also, instead of saying, "You NEED to do this", or "You SHOULD do this", say, "It would mean a lot to me if you (insert request)." Telling her what she needs and should do will only get her on defense. I really, really, want to say leave this marriage soon. Especially, and I mean especially before children. Having a child is no easy feat and it will only further harm a suffering marriage. But I see you want to work this out, so I urge you to pray together as a couple. Really pray. Seek advice from your bishop, and get into counseling soon. I'm sorry this has been so hard for both of you.

I was carpooling with Paul this morning (Jesus was copiloting another car) and I asked him what he thought about Mormons having "tea" parties. He said it was "lawful" but "not expedient".

The idea of a "tea party" as a general matter doesn't offend me or anything; but it frankly smacks of Babylon-envy. Can the Young Women do a "wine tasting" with various grape juices? Can the Young Men do a "kegger", as Pale asks? Can the Elders' Quorum have a "bachelor party", so long as the "stripper" ends her show with a one-piece swimming suit firmly in place? People will do what people will do, and I try not to judge too harshly. But from the standpoint of planning an official, Church-sponsored activity; it strikes me that we should recognize that certain customs are so inextricably tied up with activities that are beyond the scope of our covenants that--at least on a community wide basis--we simply have no business trying to adapt those customs into our own Zion culture.