bytebear

I agree that a long term relationship is different than clothing choice. However, the notion that gay couples can't be loving parents is hogwash. There are gay parents who are far better role models for parental love than some (many) heterosexual couples. Being gay doesn't mean you are a bad parent, or an unloving person. No more than a straight marriage automatically makes you a good candidate for raising kids. The church isn't condemning gay marriage because of the social sciences of raising a child. There are eternal ramifications. But those same ramifications exist for single parents, or even parents who are restricted from temple sealings due to various sinful behavior, including things like alcohol use. So, please don't think the church is condemning gay marriage because gay people are incapable of raising children successfully, even spiritually. That's simply not true, and it's not the reason for the initial ban, for that matter. The ban was so that children wouldn't have to choose the church over a parent. The policy was siding with the parents. And now that the new policy is in place, I think some members will have to learn to love gay parents who's children may be in their ward. It may be a spiritual test they are unable to pass.

Sorry, I am late to the game. But how is this any different than a kid who's parents smoke, or drink, or who's parents work on Sunday, or who's parents have questionable taste in clothing or occupations that are not in line with the gospel? I remember having a friend from the neighborhood who was in our scout troop. Non-member single mom, at a time where that was rare. We didn't care, and the church leaders wanted to make sure he was welcome in every way. His mom didn't want him baptized, but she recognized the good that the church did. Now, whenever I see a church policy that lasts only a few years, I immediately think "separating the wheat from the chaff." This policy really affected only a tiny fraction of families. But it sure did reveal those who would cast off the church and not follow the prophet. I am sure they won't be back, and frankly, I see it as a way for the church to clear out the dead brush. Once the brush is cleared, the Lord restores fertile ground for those who remain (including gay members).

Technically it's a 15 pin connector (male or female). The other common one is 9 pin. The particular style is a DE-15 (D being the connector, A,B,C,D, E being the size, and the number being the pins in the connector. More commonly called a D-Sub for D-Subminiture. Cute how they thought that connector was small, eh? Yes they have standard uses for computers like VGA connectivity, but they can be used for anything. PCs use the 9 pin as a serial port. Atari video games used them for joysticks (among other things). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D-subminiature

I should point out that Moroni's promise isn't restricted to the truth of the Gospel, or the Book of Mormon, but is something that can be used on any matter of truth. Simply put, God does answer prayers.

I have to laugh. We had some issues with the Newport Beach temple. The original design was too big and too white. So they changed the style and made it more of a tan color. The irony is that the area is a flood with mega churches (including Rick Warren's Purpose Driven Life campus). The temple is actually smaller than the LDS chapel next to it. Here's a map to give you comparison. And by the way, the Mariner church was kind enough to allow their parking lot be used during the open house.

Of course they are targeting him. This is what happens when you pick and choose which liberties apply.

I would prefer a party that was for small government, weed out corruption, fiscally conservative, and state run social programs. Is that too much to ask? I hate that congress even discusses welfare, health care, education, infrastructure, etc. etc, let alone tries to run them.

I was bothered that they quoted unofficial sources but implied they were associated directly with the church.

They may not be hiding, but the MSM is hiding them.

Ok, so where is the coverage in the MSM of this? What story other than an underground video describing their actions is there in the news? Do you have any sources in the media? This is the cover up I mean.

And no, I don't think Trump or the GOP invented a far left branch of the Democratic party to split the party. I think it was a Communist branch that is attempting to take over the party, and has used academia and the youth vote to do it. This video is making the rounds, and I have no reason to doubt the conclusions. Basically, a group behind the scenes has run far left puppets to take over vulnerable Democrat incumbents in solid Democrat districts, basically taking over the party through surrogates.

Of course they are. Bernie Sanders in practice, policy and life experience is a Marxist Communist. He calls it "democratic socialism" but that's just a sugar coated way to let the media call it something it is not. This is a lie. and the MSM is going along with it. The AOC platform is equally communism, but is sold as "social justice". Let's not pretend this is forthcoming and they aren't hiding anything. They most certainly are.

The internet. The church began emphasizing the church name over "Mormon" a decade ago, and their search hits fell dramatically. People simply couldn't find official sources when they searched for Mormon stuff. So, they did SEO techniques to get people to official information using the search term "Mormon" I think they still do, but are now directing to Latter-day Saint sites, and hopefully they can correct misconceptions. And I think the Sister Wives and the Warren Jeffs news really confused people on who were Mormons. So the church is smart to just abandon the fringe Mormon news from official use by just not using Mormon any more.

Well, LDS claim to have the fullness of the Gospel, but not an exclusivity on truth.

I also suspect within the next 4 years, "democratic socialism" will be replaced with open Marxist Communism.

Well, if you watched the news, you would have no idea their agenda, or it's poopooed as hysterics.

FYI, I grew up in Holladay and I still love it there. But the prices are well above 400k on average.

The benches are still desirable. Homes are older though.

I would say Murray or Taylorsville, but the homes are a bit older than you may want.

People ask where I live in California, and I just say, near Disneyland. Easier than trying to explain the geography.

There is a shadow communist arm of the Democratic party which is running far left candidates against incumbent Democrats in order to force the party to the far extreme left. The DNC needs to correct this, or they will be over taken.

I grew up in South Salt Lake, and moved to Southern California when I was in my late 20s, and have been here for almost 30 years. I find the church is known as a bit quirky, but well respected. The LDS kids are usually the good kids in school, and non-Mormon families are happy to have them hang out with them in school, but not marry or be more serious because they don't want them caught up in a quirky church (putting it politely). One of my coworkers was worried her daughter would get married in a temple and not be let in. But what still kind of surprises me about Utah anyway is the culture is so Mormonic. Either you are in the church, or you are mocking the church. I am used to the LA Weekly and the OC Weekly which are standard liberal news mags, but in Utah, the SLC Weekly was the same thing, but every single article was about how rotten those Mormons were. The non-Mormons in Utah, particularly in politics are really bitter. Even smoking. Here in California, non-smoking laws are praised by the left, but in Utah, they are all upset about it. It's really bizarre. That said, I have thought about moving back, but the winters and family out here keep me here. Thing is, there are enough Mormons here to make it feel culturally significant. There are several church buildings nearby, so I still feel like I am home. And some of the inland suburbs feel very community driven, like the neighborhoods I grew up in.

Tell the testimony speaker to stay on topic.

Reagan would be nice. For living, maybe Rand Paul or Trey Gowdy. Jesus would have a hard time I think, because ultimately he is a benevolent dictator (but actually is) and would be unable to rule in our secular, imperfect world.

I know a lot of people get upset when many of the leaders are businessmen, but this is an international church now, and we need leadership familiar with the business and political world to achieve the goals of the Lord. Do you know the first non-US country to have two temples? Germany. Why? Because of the savvy of our leaders, we were able to negotiate a temple in East Germany before the wall fell. After the reunification of Germany, the country had a West German and East German temple. That is simply remarkable, and could no be done if the Lord did not place those leaders in those positions. A friend from high school was in the Austria mission before the temple and was one of the first missionaries to enter East Germany. The Lord knew what was coming, and prepared the people years before it happened.