ryanh

That seems quite contrary to what I have understood regarding self-reliance and fiscal responsibility taught by the church.

Digging way back to 1979 in the Ensign's I Have a Question.

I have questions for you Josh. Is you your friend just curious about these things, or is she trying to determine if religion is/isn't true by its ability to answer these questions? What do these questions have to do with the reality of Heavenly Father and his plan for us? If it were me, I'd be trying to steer her away from trying to intellectually grasp the gospel toward trying to feel the Spirit when contemplating matters that truly pertain to salvation. The Spirit is the only way to bring lasting and true conversion. Pseudo-conversion by intellect is a poor substitute.

LOL. I'm scared now! I love the ADDers in my life. But the condition can bring with it a special set of circumstances. No offense was intended by my remark, and I'm glad you didn't shoot me for that comment. :) I just find that the impulsivity of the comments made at the ADD site can be pretty wild. It can get pretty entertaining really quick!

I'm of the opinion it is the people. Some other forums I participate in with similar formats don't always have the same level of contention show through. Yet others do. The primary difference is the people attracted to those forums. For example, there was an ADHD forum that I participated in with a very similar format to this one. You want to talk about contention and fights!!! Then, another large forum I visit that is based on a wildlife watching, also with similar format, is much more calm. There are a few that like to make waves there, but otherwise threads rarely if ever close. See the reprinted talk of David O. McKay in the August Ensign. He shares a story there relating the quality of the wheat field to the individual wheat berries. It's a nice analogy the way it is described there. Ryan

A few possible factors come to mind. 1) - Just what Pam said. It's a blog, not a forum system. 2) - The level of control may be much different at those sites. Any offensive or rude comments could be deleted, or comments may require pre-approval to appear. I would expect that troll posts are much more likely to be removed. 3) - A forum such as Feminist Mormon Housewives is far more likely to attract like minded individuals than a general topic site. 4) - Sites that would relate to deeper or more controversial topics would likely not be visited by the less mature or seasoned person. There are a whole lot of immature or unseasoned people on open sites like this. Registration is free and easy.

Accountibility is a good thing too! Can we count on you to check back in on Monday and let us know if you were able to get the Bishop aside and talk to him?

Congrats on seeking help! Obviously it is a big step to bring this out of the dark and try to deal with it. Keep at it. Please don't assume your Bishop will tell your parents. Ask him if he would or not. Having your parents involved in helping you though this just might be a whole lot better than you are anticipating. If they are typical parents, they love you deeply, and would do what they can to help, not condemn. There are a handful of threads in this Advice forum touching upon this subject. There is good advice in those threads as well. Here is the search results for "porn addiction" for this forum. LDS Mormon Forums - Search Results = Porn Addiction Yes, you are still eligible to serve a mission if you fully repent (don't forget - that includes confession and change).

For those that may want a UT talk show host's take on the 'controversy': Put the following url into your media player: http://pandora.bonnint.net/audio/2009_07_28_doug3.mp3

Not necessairly. I was able to obtain confirmation that it was scripture without having to read the entire thing. IMO the most important step to deciding whether or not to be baptized into the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is to obtain a witness through the Spirit.

It's not easy to please everyone. I've done my fair share of goof ups and offended those when I had no intent to do so. I have several thoughts about it.I don't presume that even the most sensitive and ready to take offense I have encountered "choose" to be offended. That may be the case at times, but I try to give the person the benefit of the doubt and assume they have the best intentions. Can't we just assume that the other person has good intentions and is actually hurt emotionally? :) :) :) It is also feels to me that there is nothing wrong with being as sensitive as we can to other people's feelings. Doing so is only developing myself and making myself a better person. Especially if I can simultaneously differentiate myself enough to not take offense. The two are not incompatible traits within one person. Paul once told the Corinthians, “Wherefore, if meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no meat while the world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend.” (1 Cor. 8:13.) When my wife takes offense to something I did (and vice versa) it doesn't help our relationship much for me to blow it off as she's just being 'too sensitive', or choosing to take offense. It can't be bad to treat our brothers and sisters the same.

In order to avoid the problem of semantics, it would seem prudent to rely on the definition of debate. Beefche gave one in the 6th post. It is the polar oppositional nature that is the problem with debate. It has it’s place – deciding what health care reform is most appropriate for the USA. It is not appropriate in matters of personal relationships or doctrinal understandings. Those are not matters of you’re wrong, I’m right. (IMO, in personal relationships, there is no right or wrong, simply different positions, and in doctrinal matters, there is a truth to be understood or discovered.) The oppositional nature and attempt to prove your own point as right that occurs in debates, rather than present your side and let it lie, feels prideful, and is a root of contention. (3 Ne. 11:29)Some people can’t help being contentious. For instance, those with ADHD often are oppositional in order to self-medicate and release their brain from the chemical imbalances otherwise restricting them. It also inhibits their ability to think before they act. Somehow, those who are in touch with their empathy have to learn to ignore these people and let them find other places to get their self-stimulants.

Can't let that slide lest a non-member or uninformed member read it and not understand that is NOT the position of the LDS Church. There are various ways to interpret the word "church", and it may not always represent a denomination or building. Take a look at it's fruits before making a choice. Elder McConkie took the harshest stance on this topic that I have ever seen, and even that was IMO a far cry from the above post. It is also important to keep in mind that "contend" may have various meanings and should be read in context IMO.

When I first joined the LDS church at 16, it took me some time to sort out exactly what the theology was. Although quite a crude analogy, it was helpful to me at first when some described the Godhead as 'a basketball team'. Three unique individuals, but with one purpose, acting like a team, each performing a different function. I'm sure there are others that can explain better than I some specifics of your questions. I'll provide a few links to official statements and articles of the church. These should help with understanding the view of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. The only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom He has sent by Jeffrey R Holland In These Three I Believe - Gordon B Hinkley In the following links, there is a lot more information under "Church Magazine Articles". God the Father Jesus Christ The Holy Ghost

Your joking right? Oh, you're not? Well, no wonder you have no evidence. Of course he doesn't answer 'some" prayers. NO DUH! On the other hand, there is incontrovertible evidence that he does answer prayers, but that evidence is reserved for those that have put in the necessary effort. I'm honestly sorry that you are in a position that you have not such evidence. Perhaps someday you will quit kicking against the pricks and do what is necessary to obtain the evidence. Missingsomething: Already done. But, I already have proof that he answers your prayers.

The only thing I can think of is to set him up. Not sure if that could be done safely or not. Probably not worth the risk. I'm sure the shelter has seen it before, so their advice is probably best.

Check back in when you have a chance and let us know you are ok! Hopefully your landlord will help like he indicated he would and find you a new place. Not sure what else to say. Sure wish he would stop. Wish I could do something about it. What's it going to take for the police to figure out his motives? At least the new gf let you know he knows where you live. Be safe!

Speaking of my own personal feelings, which I think would be a similar to most LDS members I know, members would be more supportive than not regarding seeking to put your children in faith supporting schooling. Every barrel has it’s own “off color” apples though. People are people so you never know exactly what you might get. As far as an official stance of the Church, I am not aware of one, and would highly doubt there is such a position taken. As Jenamarie stated, there is the possibility of some feedback from the schooling group. Obviously they seem open to all sorts of denominations, but it only takes one misinformed parent to cause a ruckus.

Wow that must be a tough position to be in. I guess what I and others can bring in offering suggestions is logical evaluation without our own emotions being caught up in your situation. From purely a practical standpoint, it would seem best for your daughter to live with your parents. From what you described, that sounds like it would not only be best for the welfare of all three kids, but for your sanity too. My head spins at all the potential complications that could be caused by your daughter's behavior towards the boys combined with lies. I suspect you'll already have scrutiny by CPS. It just sounds like a misunderstanding waiting to happen. Wow does that ever sound familiar. I participate on a private forum for spouses of those who have ADHD (which your AH likely has, along with several other issues IMO). Feeling like the only parent, the one on whose shoulders all significant burdens fall, is one of the most common complaints. You are justified IMO in wondering why, and lamenting how unfair it is. Just try not to let it get the better of you. You're kids need you to be able to step up and choose what is best for them.Wishing you the best.

I do see now that the childish comment was pointed at rebellion, not looking over his shoulder. My bad, sorry, I misread that. I still see the "shocking" that Rachelle also has BP comment and calling her condition a 'snake in the grass' as offensive. Were someone to call any condition I had as "shocking", and use an idiom with negative connotations, that would not feel good. There also appears to be fundamental misunderstandings of the nature of BP, that when understood, make much of the tone of the post difficult. Were Rachelle's husband to be the only one to have BP, then perhaps the post would be more appropriate, although still hurtful to anyone that did read it that had BP. (and no, I don't don have BP, but through various experiences, have great compassion for anyone that does - they are not people that inherently seek to betray or deceive - they have a condition that they may not be in control of.)

Before I posted on the topic, I did just that. I'm well aware of the situation. Interesting that you would assume that I did not. You KNOW that is not what I pointed out as needing an apology. I agree with your opinion that she should not "immediately get[] back together with him", and I included something similar in my original post. But I didn't even touch upon that in the post you quoted did I?What I did touch upon was calling her behavior "childish", or her condition as "shocking news" and a "snake in the grass". Have some compassion man. She's the one dealing with a difficult situation, not you - you should deal with your anger towards BP in a different thread or venue, or choose to not comment when your feelings are more eminent in your mind than that of the poster asking for help. Act like a baptized member as Alma describes: "Yea, and are willing to mourn with those that mourn; yea, and comfort those that stand in need of comfort, . . ." I recognize I'm being harsh in calling this out. But it is not easy to see my Sister being called names when she doesn't deserve it. That goes for all the posts I see on lds.net where, apparently because of anonymity, people are so willing to say hurtful things to their brothers and sisters. Quite unbecoming.

Apples and Oranges. Teaching vs repentance. No one is forgiven via dicipline. Repentenance can only happen of one's own volition. Conversely, Rachel's husband's 'things' cannot be dealt with the by Church alone. He has to be a willing and wanting participant in the repentance and disipline process. How would dicipline be of any benefit? It would be akin to yelling at a masochist and expecting it to cause them discomfort! Wow, you sure are willing to be openly critical of local leadership in this thread. Neither you, nor I have any clue as to what promptings your bishop, or Rachel's Branch Pres might have had. They may have dealt with each situation with Solomon-type wisdom guided by the Spirit, yet because it isn't how our natural man would have handled it, we are left kicking against the pricks and damning ourselves. Not cricicizing leadership is not a ploy to keep membership in line. I trust it is a spiritual principal for OUR benefit, not the leader's or the Church's.

I wish there was a "no thanks" or "vehemently disagree" button. I'm actually surprised that there were some that agreed with that post.I think that Rachel has a far better grasp of BP that a person who has "lived with someone that had" BP I. I'm not sure how you feel it's of benefit to anyone to say "shocking news that the original poster also suffers from this", or call her condition "a snake in the grass". Do you really know she or her husband has BP I? Or perhaps she or her husband has BP II? Do you even know the difference? It is also readily evident that she knows far more about treating and controlling the symptoms than you. You should also be aware of comorbid disorders that often present themselves with various mental illnesses. So what you think you know about BP may actually be aspects of other disorders combined with BP. Painting other children of our HF with such a broad brush is an unfortunate and painful thing to observe. While in the process of labeling behaviors of those that are hurting in mean ways (kicking them while they are down IMO), perhaps we should label "making certain he gets his medication is childish" as brutish, arrogant, and unbecoming of a follower of Christ. I think you owe Rachel an apology for being so harsh and coming off as uncaring.

As of late, my two oldest children substitute "24/7" for 'frequently', 'lots', 'too much', etc. They use it 24/7! Ugh! Apparently everyong at their school uses it 24/7. I have grown to dislike "Does that make sense?" Perhaps it is situationally induced by a few individuals that I do not regard as all that intelligent, asking me if common and simple things 'make sense'. Do you really take me for an idiot? Yes, I can grasp concepts fairly well. The question is whether or not you are capable of communicating in a coherent manner! Quit pointing out that you can't communicate well by asking "does that make sense?"!