LittleWyvern

That's because that's exactly what it is (and it usually isn't vegan, ethier).

Wait a second. Said woman is supposedly mad at parents allowing their children to be overweight, so she's going to give only non-overweight kids candy to compensate? slow:clap:

I went on my mission after a year of college, and I'd personally recommend that over the alternative. My freshman year was the first time I had lived on my own, and the life skills I learned that year helped me be better prepared for taking care of myself on my mission. Going to a church school (I went/am going to BYU) was also nice because it was a spiritually strengthening environment. There's also Mission Prep classes you can take, and the bishops of the freshman wards are very supportive of missionary goals. Maybe you can help your Bishopric/counselor understand that going to a church school for a year won't lessen your son's desire to serve a mission one bit. The only way that I can see someone going to a church college for a year and then deciding not to serve a mission is if they didn't want to go on a mission to begin with.

I think at that point it's the Bishop's responsibility to give Ms. Superwoman a gentle reminder in private that it's important to make sure everybody has an opportunity to participate in class discussions and ward projects. EDIT: and by "the Bishop's responsibility" I mean "it's not your responsibility so let other people worry about it for you." :)

There is a giant fuzzy line between doing good to enrich others and doing good to enrich yourself. We are often doing both at once, and it's nearly impossible to notice in yourself when you cross that line. Certain things like perfectionism may predispose us to lean toward one side of that balance. I think the key to getting through this situation without conflict relies on two things: 1) Don't attribute malice to Ms. Superwoman. She may genuinely think that she's enriching others when she rambles about how good she is. You may not feel that way, but at least try understanding her comments in the spirit they were probably meant. 2) Understand that everybody's perfect is different. What's best for one person probably isn't the best for another. Make sure you (and your kids) understand this concept. The reason why there cannot be a competition is because it's impossible to compare two people with a straight-across comparison that's implicit in "Why aren't we more like Ms. Superwoman's family?" Your answer was correct: it's because you aren't Ms. Superwoman's family, but it's one thing to say that and quite another to believe in it enough to where it doesn't bother you. Perhaps you might even help Ms. Superwoman understand this someday. EDIT: I do want to remark here that I speak some of this via personal experience. I've struggled with perfectionism in the past (and I still do now to some extent), and it's a mystery how something that seems on its surface like it would give someone too much humility can so easily be twisted into a source of pride and competition.

We have a word for that, it's called pride. Those who struggle with perfectionism can often fall victim to this kind of pride. Just remember that personal perfection is called personal for a reason: everybody's "perfect" is different.

Unless your youtube video has third-party content, you generally keep the rights to the video you upload. Here's youtube's official policies on copyright.

Take only rocks, leave only slightly flatter surfaces. EDIT: I think I may be remembering this wrong...

More updates: the Senate deal just passed through a major obstacle, as senators Ted Cruz and Mike Lee have both said that they will not attempt to filibuster or block the bill from coming to a vote. I don't see too many more obstacles for this bill unless Speaker Boehner changes his mind. I think now is when we can reasonably feel optimistic.

In more serious news, we may be seeing the light at the end of the tunnel. After Speaker Boehner's House plan collapsed and failed to come to a vote, he has said that he will allow a Senate plan to come to a vote in the House. It is expected that this plan will pass in both the House and the Senate. Stocks are way up already today.

I think a good takeaway from marshac's comment is that we should treat caffeine the same as we treat any drug that is potentially habit forming. I had to take sleeping medicine as a child so I feel well-equipped to responsibly take caffeine when I need to. If anybody isn't familiar with the standard ways to reduce your chance on dependence, there's a lot of literature out there that shows how to be smart about potentially habit-forming drugs. That being said, I really wish it was law to label the exact dosage of caffeine on everything. It makes it hard to keep track of my consumption.

Things are getting serious, I guess.

People told me there were bad parts of Provo/Orem. I believed them. Then I served a mission in San Bernardino, CA. I don't believe those people anymore.

If you haven't listened to Elder Holland's talk from Saturday Evening Conference, watch it. If you have, listen to it again. Nothing I say could be as helpful or powerful as Elder Holland's words.

I'm curious how much of that 83% is only functional because they're running on fumes, so to speak. There's a lot of federal agencies that are only active because they're using reserve funds. The only shutdown effect that affected me is the total closure of NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology). I was doing a research project in cryptography...

That's correct, but only because the Bill of Rights (which includes the Establishment Clause which prohibits religious figures in schools) did not apply to state governments until the the ratification of the 14th Amendment, which went into effect nearly 77 years after the 1st Amendment was ratified.

I thought this talk was amazing, not just for the words, but for the reaction. I'm seeing facebook comments from some less active friends that are saying that this is the first time they've seriously considered going to Church regularly in a long time. The Church definitely needs voices like Pres. Uchtdorf right now.

There's some sort of hotlinking protection going on with the image, I can't see it. I've rehosted it on imgur if anybody else can't see it:

Oh no! Joseph Smith was influenced by the style of diction in the King James Bible his family owned! Whatever do we do?

Sincere prayer, sincere scripture study, and sincere fasting are probably the three best tools in the toolbox for that. :)

I'll echo everything Eowyn said, but if you do want to get in touch with the missionaries, it's super easy. You can even do an online chat if you want. :)

I'm not trying to address the content of the article, but I see a lot of people in the US cite the Daily Mail like it's a reputable newspaper when it is very much not. If I were to cite, say, The Globe or The National Enquirer, I'd expect to be laughed out of the thread. Citing the Daily Mail isn't much different: all of my examples are essentially what are called "supermarket tabloids." That being said, I would be interested to see if any of the content in the article can be backed up by more reputable news sources.

...you realize the Daily Mail is a tabloid, right?