NormalMormon

Bearing our testimony is a wonderful thing. I think you are right that we really need to feel the spirit, and not worry about what someone else said, or what the Spirit told THEM. It's different for everyone. I DO think that we need to be more diverse in our testimonies. Especially with children. We need to encourage them NOT to say "I know these things are true, I know Jesus lives, I know Joseph Smith was a prophet...etc..." because it's so repetitive that they don't even know what they are saying. And even if they finally realize WHAT they are saying, they continue to bear the same testimony throughout their adult lives. It's just vain repetition. We need to encourage our children to be UNIQUE, and find a way to bear their testimonies with experiences, and thoughts, and feelings, not repeated verbatim lines taught in primary.

That's true. Even for Mormons. Having as many kids as you can pop out isn't what I call "rational" and I would argue that these parent are far more dysfunctional or irrational than those who choose not to have kids on the basis of environmental preservation. We all know the welfare moms who have seven children from different fathers are a problem. But we don't focus on the families that completely ignore rationale and decide to have 6 - 10 children in hopes of "raising seed unto the gospel" or for no other reason than they don't know how to time monthly intercourse. These people are the ones I would be more worried about raising "dysfunctional" children. (Okay everyone, I don't want to hear how "great" these parents are and how "wonderful" the huge families are. Yes, they have love and blah, blah, blah. But so do other, smaller, families.) We can't really argue what's "rational" and "normal." We can't say that having 1-3 kids is perfectly healthy and normal and not dysfunctional. However, the reasons behind having or not having children is what makes these people equally irrational. If you had three genius prodigy children, I would of course go ahead and keep reproducing. If they were all idiots, I would stop. I would also not keep having kids just to contribute to the population of a church. Likewise, if the only reason to not have kids is because you might stop one person from producing car emissions, that's insane. They could argue that "well if everyone didn't have kids, the world would be a better place." Yeah, but who would live in it?

Oh yeah, because we are all exactly like our parents. Just because someone is concerned with the environment, doesn't make them nuts or dysfunctional. And the people who don't want to have children, shouldn't. But if the ONLY thing holding them back is their environmental footprint, it doesn't make them crazy. Just cautious. Going all "China" on us won't help anything. If these people raise their children to care about the environment, unlike many of the children that are raised today, then maybe the children can actually DO something about it. I think we need to worry about how we can make life better for our kids, not avoiding the situation by not having kids. That's a real spineless way out. That, and if you're going to have unprotected sex, prepare to have a kid. These people who get abortions to "make the world a better place" disgust me.

Yes, I read this and many other websites I've seen have women that are like this. It's a horrendous thought. Imagine if women stopped having children. Stopped teaching them, educating them, and helping make the world a better place. It's like they are "giving up."

Jenamarie - I know. I wished I would have said that. I just got this huge knot in my stomach and wanted to scream "I QUIT!" He did say that every time he talks to Mormons about their faith that they back down, never talk to him again, don't let their kids around him (when he was younger), etc... So I was hesitant to back down...

I posted on my blog about this, and got a few responses. But I wanted to know what you all thought about it because I don't know whether to be mad or not. Do you get into talks about your faith? Is it alright at work? I just don't know....

I think it's wrong to simply "call" people up. Like a teacher does in school. Yes, people do have fears of speaking in public. I get so nervous speaking in church, yet not in any other place. (And I have to public speak in my JOB!) Church is a whole different thing. You are speaking from your heart. But even still, you are right. People would have a VERY hard time coming to church, knowing that they might be "called on." I can't even imagine this. I could MAYBE understand a "Fast and Testimony-esque" meeting, where people ELECT to speak. But we all know how many people go to those...(where I live, F&T is dreaded.)

Testimonies are a great thing, don't get me wrong here. But there are so many better things to be talking about in church than conditioning our children to say, "I know this church is true, I know our prophet lives, I know Jesus lives, I love my mom and dad." After awhile testimonies don't become testimonies. They become repetitive paragraphs to please parents. Especially for those raised in the church. Agenda-less meetings might be alright if what people speak on IS NOT a testimony. Maybe if they had something REAL to say. Something that we can learn. Something out of the ordinary. But asking people to go up and start saying the EXACT same thing over and over again without thinking is basically the definition of a cult....(ahem, or the Catholic Church.)

Paying tithing with a CREDIT CARD? That's like REVERSE tithing. You're not supposed to pay more than 10%. 10% is a universal rate for everyone. You can't get "more blessings" by giving 20%. What about the people who give 10%, and are unable to give more? Should they get less blessings? No. That's why everyone pays the same. However, if you want to donate to charity, you can do it privately. Not everything must go through church. But if you are in serious credit card debt, you probably shouldn't be donating more than 10% anyway. Cut up her credit cards. It's the only way I could ever get my spending under control. Never spend anything on the card until it can be controlled. (Which is when she's debt free in this case.)

You're daughter deserves justice. No matter how painful, you need to remind her that it is VERY important that she help put this sicko in prison. Be sure to remind her that he could do it to other girls, and has, and if she did this, it would save lives and save other girls from the same fate. I can only imagine that the Lord gives you hardships because not only will you "grow," but you are also one of the precious few that are strong enough to handle these hardships. I can't imagine what it would be like for a nice, rich, doctor/bishop, who lives in a mansion and has few problems other than his 7 perfect blonde children bugging him to take them to Seaworld....ANYWAY - you get my point. Not everyone is strong enough to withstand the things you've gone through. The idea isn't to try and ignore it, or make your life superficially "better." The point is to act upon all these things, and be a "viking" of sorts. Look your wife in the eyes and say "I LOVE YOU." Go after this guy who did that to your daughter. Move away and find a new ward. Or stay and find new friends. In any case, be active about what you do. Make choices. Move on with life. But the LAST thing you should do is sit around and wait for God to throw something great into your lap. A little action on your part, and God handles the rest.

First of all, I am not planning on "leaving" the church for this little discrepancy. I understand that in God's due time He will reveal all, and possibly allow women to have the priesthood one day. I, along with everyone in here, cannot presume to know why he hasn't revealed it yet. The feminist movement already happened, and we still did not receive and revelation that women should hold the priesthood. The civil rights movement happened, yet He then revealed that blacks could hold the priesthood. With so many women in the church opting to defend men's right to the sole holding of the priesthood, I guess it wouldn't make sense but to us select few who find it unequal. Until women actually start *caring* whether or not they are able to have it, I don't think God will reveal it. Just because I am being straightforward, doesn't mean I am "nitpicking." And I haven't discounted ANY of the testimonies or answers given in this forum. Thanks for answering the first few questions I had, they make sense. I guess I shouldn't go on heresay! I will let you know how things go in the temple.

rameumptom - Thanks. You actually gave some insight there. While we can have the Patriarchal Priesthood, that doesn't give us the authority to baptize, confirm, lead, etc... Yeah, none of the apostles were women..., but that was when women weren't held in the same regard as they are today. Ugh. This whole things annoys me.

Well the thing is, I DO understand. I am playing devil's advocate mostly, as I really (somtimes secretly) want to be a stay at home mom with a bunch of little runts, and I want my husband to go earn all the money. I think it's completely NUTS that couples choose not to have children. (Mostly.) That's just my personal belief. But I can't sit back and pretend that I think it is acceptable for an entire church full of male leaders (yes, LEADERS) not to give the exact same opportunity to women. And with the only reason for NOT doing do because women have a different "responsibility."

First of all, I'm not trying to belittle, and in no way do I consider myself “better” than them. You are the one who first pointed the finger here. I am just not sugar coating anything. I am not being rude either, just trying to get as much insight as possible. The only way to do that is to state things how they are. Sorry for not stating so, but I do appreciate those who took the time to write. Simply, no one has answered my questions thoroughly because frankly, I don't think anyone knows. I am simply stating my opinions and facts. Yet the only answers I keep getting from people are the same things over and over again, and everyone seems to just address the things THEY feel are important. Yes, my posts are kind of long – but at least take the time to read and understand and reply to the things that matter. The only responses I keep getting are, “Pray this, and read scriptures that” – which I already do. But don’t you think I would get answers there instead of coming here? I am talking about our church as a society (and really the world.) However, I suppose the world isn’t ready for perfect equality. Perfect equality would give literally everyone the right to do the same as everyone else, even in church. While many leaders of the church have emphasized the equality in our roles as men and women, it doesn’t matter what they say. Men and women can go on claiming that giving life, and nurturing children, etc… is EQUAL to that of holding the priesthood, presiding over every meeting, being able to baptize, being able to give blessings, being in the bishopric, being the bishop for that matter, and all the other things men with the priesthood can do, and women cannot. It’s like we are punished for being able to bear children because it is thought of as a gift that men cannot have. (Which is not anyone’s fault but nature’s.) Must society “make-up” for the “blessing” of child bearing by giving men opportunities that women cannot have?

It seems as though both women and men are quick to sing the praises of women, and put them "higher" up on a pedestal than men, which is not what I was hoping to find. Men say "You women do what we cannot." Women say "Men don't have the BOND with their child." And so on.... This feels simply patronizing. Like you must build women up in order to compensate for the fact that we do not have the same opportunities as men. You are right in that we are equal, but different. We are equal but different BIOLOGICALLY. The only thing that makes our roles different is not only man, but as we've obviously seen here, women. You don't think Paul, a Roman, who was the single most influential writer in the Bible, had anything to do with what "Jesus" said? Same with the other books of the Bible? Imperfect MEN wrote the books, and omitted the information given by women, such as Mary Magdalene. You don't think she had a story to tell? The rulers of past years have determined what our Bible does and does not say. Same with the BoM. Although it's much more accurate due to its age. Jesus didn't sit down with a pen (quill, whatever) and say, "Here is what I say, put it in there." Anyway... The point is, it makes no sense whatsoever to deny anyone the opportunity to hold any position in the church. God inspires priesthood holders and the bishopric, and if they continue to be close-minded and think this way, they will never receive any revelation telling them that a woman should have the priesthood. Same with blacks. No one had an open mind until - wait - the civil rights movement! Having children is not just the mother's ability, as we all know. It takes one man, and one woman. Exactly half. The woman carries it and bears it. Yes, there is a bond between mother and child - at first especially. However, if we don't stop assuming the MOTHER is the only one that can bond, we are sorely mistaken. Fathers can bond with their children just as well as mothers can, it's MAN that has made it awkward for men to do such things. (Why do you think men have nipples? Just kidding...but really....)

rena goldmoon - Yes, that's WHY the entire idea is just wrong, wrong, wrong! Women SHOULD not be conditioned to think that making babies and being stay at home moms is the best option for them. I can see that, while I really mean no offense, you have been conditioned to believe that education isn't as important as child rearing. However, how are we to teach our children anything of value if all we are able to teach them is the little we know? We should be educating ourselves, going on missions, waiting to get married, and DATING our potential husbands for at least a year before we jump right into marriage. The idea that a woman's sole purpose in life is to rear children is rediculous. It's a great purpose, but simply not enough.

Once again.... Everyone thinks that talking about the temple is a faux pas. However, I've asked my bishop, I've asked my temple prep teacher, and the ONLY things you aren't allowed to talk about are the signs/tokens and symbol meaning. So please, continue with why the HUSBAND should be taking his WIFE through the temple. And not the other way around. Why can't a woman go on a mission, then take a MAN through the temple?

Comparing child birth and the priesthood is like comparing apples and oranges. IT doesn't make sense because they have nothing to do with eachother. If it's such a "burden" or "responsibility" then why can't women have it still? I am just as tough, if not more so than half the skinny little missionaries out there!

Well, because "ideally" as I just mentioned, women will be married to their husbands, who have already gone on a mission. So their husbands have already gone through and understand everything already....sounds pretty sweet to a guy! But then the woman goes through, and she is in NO WAY prepared. (After all, her and her future husband have only been "dating" for a few weeks before this, and it is unlikely that he cared about preparing her for what she would see in the temple.)

Actually, women are inherently more mature than men when it comes to age. A 21 year old female biologically has developed more than a male has. (We all learned this in 6th grade sex ed remember?) So the only logical reason why anyone would make this rule is so that women who graduate high school are more inclined to either a) go to college or b) get married to a return missionary (or both), instead of feeling the need to go on a mission. And just because women can do this, doesn't mean that they should have any less privledges than men. What God physically gave us is unchangeable and from the start, we should have considered everything equal, including child birth etc... It is MAN who has changed everything around so it's "unfair" to men for not being able to breastfeed or whatever. Just because they physically CAN'T do what we do, doesn't mean we need to make up for it by allowing men to do all this stuff, and women not to.

I know we aren’t supposed to talk about the things that happen in the temple, because it is sacred. However, if you claim that the things I’ve heard AREN’T true, then why not discuss it? We aren’t supposed to talk about what all the stuff MEANS…. I think it’s wrong that we don’t prepare young women to go to the temple. They are smacked in the face with all this stuff they don’t know, and are scared to know. It’s a very strange experience for many of them. So naturally, preparing them for it (above and beyond temple prep classes) should be necessary. If not for just the sake of keeping them in the church. HemiDakota – That the dumbest thing I have ever heard. Yes, we can have children. That’s a physical difference, just like women can’t have male genitalia. Women can’t impregnate other women. Those are physical differences. God didn’t say, “Oh, well since women can have kids, I will give men the priesthood.” It’s not like that. “A woman is free from this requirement in order to be saved. To me that's a nice thing. A woman is able to have authority in the Church without priesthood ordinations.” This makes no sense at all. Why would women need a man to give priesthood blessings on the family? Why can’t she do it herself? If her husband dies, and she doesn’t want to spend the rest of her life with some other strange man, then she should have the priesthood for this purpose. It’s also not right that a woman has to wait until she is 21 in order to go on a mission, and a man gets to go when he is 18.

Funny how we can't even talk about our faith in our own forums. I understand most of it. Only you still didn't answer.... Why can't WOMEN have the priesthood?

Agreed. Even though it's sick.

Yes. Why allow polygamist groups to do this in the first place? Even if they ARE sane. That, by default, makes them all INSANE. Statutory rape, that's what it's called. Every single child in this practice SHOULD be taken away and "deprogrammed." They were taught all their lives that "it's okay if a 50 year old man has sex with you, it's what God wants." There's no other way than to teach them that what they've been learning is WRONG. The FLDS practice is ILLEGAL, and rightfully so. Taking children away from these practices isn't the act of a power hugry government - but an act of kindness. Taking children away from Catholics who teach their children LEGAL values doesn't make sense.

This is absolutely horrendous. Of course, the first thing many of these children are naturally going to do is start thinking the CHURCH is wrong, not the freaky FLDS church. But I would MUCH rather have these children out of harms way, and out of the hands of a disgusting group of polygamists, than make sure they are "lifelong" members of the church. How could anyone wish such a thing? I due time they will see the difference between what they were a part of, and what a Latter Day Saint is today. Until then, they need support and love in any form - not people worry about whether or not they are going to be "good - standing members of the LDS church."