OtterPop

Palerider, I don't think you were responding to my post, because we posted at the same time, but I want to point out that Moroni 10 gives responsibilities and conditions that the seeker must meet -- but patience isn't one of them.

. . . and some of us have studied, pondered, prayed, have done everything we were asked and still did not gain a testimony. That's my point.

Is the promise in Moroni 10 real or not? If so, we are all entitled to a witness. If not, then it really doesn't matter.

prospectmom, I'm not sure whether you mean psychological physiological, but if you think sexual orientation -- which is not something you "believe" in or not; perhaps you don't understand the term -- is something people deliberately choose, you are ignorant of the complexities of human sexuality and gender.

prisonchaplain, I have no problem with gay people wanting to control their behaviors to fit with what they believe to be moral. Neither does the APA. Homosexuality is not a mental illness. One's sexual orientation is not a mental illness. I believe that what the APA objects to is the claim that it is, and that these organizations present themselves as being able to use psychological techniques to "cure" homosexuality. Although people can certainly choose their sexual behaviors, and psychological interventions can help them do so, this is not the same as changing one's sexual orientation. There is no well-designed, longitudinal study that shows that people can successfully change their sexual orientation. Yet some of these organizations claim to do exactly that.

Some things are better managed at the state level, but not everything. I'm assuming no one here is in favor of having slave states and free states?

Your neighbor may well believe that he/she was born at 22 weeks gestation in 1972, but it simply ain't so. Do an internet search. Perhaps the neighbor's parents hadn't -- ahem -- been married long enough and spun this tale.

The Republicans are not "losing ground"; the party is in a shambles because of kowtowing to party factions who are a couple of standard deviations to the right of even the conservative mean. You think McCain would have lost so badly if he had picked who he actually wanted as his running mate?

The Republicans aren't doing too well these days -- largely because of letting ultraconservatives run the party on social issues. Returning to these particular "roots" is killing the Republicans.

If you're hoping for a Mormon in the White House, I think Jon Huntsman, Jr., (Utah's current governor) has a better shot than Mitt. He's an up-and-comer on the national scene, hasn't been all over the political spectrum, and actually comes across as a human being on camera. I didn't vote for him in 2004, but he and Jim Matheson (the Democratic opponent) ran one of the cleanest races I've never seen. They committed to no negative campaigning and stuck to it. I usually vote straight Democrat, but I voted for Huntsman in 2008. He's been an excellent governor, and I wouldn't rule out voting for him for president, either.

1) Job Opportunities b) Women have slightly fewer job opportunities than men 2) Employment Wages b) Women receive slightly less pay than men do 3) Interest Opportunities c) Women are accepted in interest groups about as often as men are 4) Political Opportunities a) Women have significantly fewer political opportunities than men 5) Representation in Higher Education d) Women are slightly overrepresented in higher education 6) Educational Opportunities c) Women and men have about the same educational opportunities 7) Religious Authority Opportunities a) Women have significantly fewer opportunities to be a religious authority than men 8) Sexualization in Media e) Women are significantly more sexualized in the media than men 9) Health d) Women are slightly more healthy than men 10) Feminism a) Feminism is largely detrimental at guaranteeing equality for women b) Feminism is slightly detrimental at guaranteeing equality for women c) Feminism is unneccesary to guarantee equality for women d) Feminism is slightly affective at guaranteeing equality for women e) Feminism is largely affective at guaranteeing equality for women I can't pick any of these answers on this one. Feminism is essential to moving toward guaranteeing equality for women -- but we're not there yet. If everyone were truly a feminist, there would instantly be equality for women, but we're working against centuries of conditioning. Effective? Yes, if it were embraced. 11) Military Service a) Women are significantly less accepted in the military than men 12) Representation in Authority a) Women are significantly underrepresented in authority positions 13) What best represents the basis for your opinions on the position of women in American culture c) Scientific journals/polls What is your sex? Female Do you consider yourself a feminist? Yes

Selfish? Are you kidding? This situation is completely untenable. He needs to quit that job yesterday. It doesn't matter if he's making $11 or $1100 an hour. It doesn't matter that he loves it. It certainly doesn't matter that he gets to play golf for free. These are trivial things compared to a marriage. If he is not willing to give notice NOW and to have NO CONTACT with this woman under any circumstances, there is no marriage for the two of you to "work out." I'm much more a shades-of-gray thinker than a black-and-white thinker -- but there's no gray here. The right thing to do is clear.

Soul Searcher seems to be using spiritual and intellectual means to seek truth about the LDS church. What's wrong with that?

Back in 1972, my sister (16 years old and pregnant) was married in the chapel.

Faded, you should think twice before stating categorically that all practices, teachings, and policies of the LDS church and its prophets are the revealed will of God himself. Most Mormons are much more moderate in their view of church "policy" and of when the prophets are actually inspired. One small example: read a few of Brigham Young's statements on race. They are impossible to defend. He was a man of his time, and it shows. The LDS church does not teach that its prophets are infallible, but that's what you appear to be saying here. I remember reading somewhere (maybe on this board?) a comment that Mormons say their prophet is not infallible, but behave as if he is, while Catholics say the Pope is infallible but behave as if he isn't. I think there's a lot of truth in that.