mrmarklin

Right.  If one concludes—as Smart alleges—that one’s sexual orientation is God-given and that God wouldn’t give us a sexual proclivity and then tell us not to act on it because doing so would make him a big meanie—ya gotta apply that to everyone. 
And that doesn’t even get into the despicable action of blowing up your family and ditching your wife of forty years merely because you no longer find her physically attractive, which—gay or straight—is an utterly evil thing to do.

Here is my take. 
As a missionary in 1968 I attended a meeting with Apostle Gordon B Hinckley who then presided over the South American missions.
He bore a testimony more or less as follows:  I have never had a vision, never heard a voice. But the Spirit has conveyed to me in no uncertain terms that Jesus is the Christ and that Joseph Smith was a prophet of God. I obtained this witness by prayer and fasting. 
As in olden times, the apostles are ones who are willing to give up all that they have to follow the Lord. Not many of us are willing to do that. I’m not. I’m looking forward to a relaxing retirement. Not gallivanting around the globe preachingthe gospel. 
Gordon B Hinckley gave his life to the Lord. That makes him a special witness. 

He was Elizabeth Smart's abductor and rapist.  @Just_A_Guy is using Ed Smart's words/description of his daughters tormentor to highlight his current hypocrisy.  While there are clear differences between the two cases, God only has one standard when it comes to sexual relationships.  Ed is now just as much a violator of that standard as was BDM.

"I deeply regret the excruciating pain this has caused her. Hurting her was never my intent. While our marriage will end, my love for Lois and everyone in my family is eternal," 
Wow, he is so brave!

Essentially he's apparently decided that his personal, carnal self-satisfaction is what the Savior really cares about.

Well look at Elder Gong. He is the first “Asian” apostle right??? He is 100% American. Born in CA. He is as much Asian as I am European.

I’m thinking of that line in Huck Finn about how you can’t pray a lie.
If, as a matter of courtesy, you use your brother’s preferred pronoun in his presence, that’s certainly none of my business (and even if it were, I’d have no beef with that).
But, as a matter of truth/objective reality, there’s still a Y chromosome.  Your brother’s a male, the emperor has no clothes, there are four lights, and all that jazz; and I’m not sure we do ourselves any favors when we buy into a delusion before God.

So, you're saying your husband doesn't do anything.... does he work?  Does he provide for the household?  If yes, then why did you not mention this as something your husband does?
Now, in my house, my husband can't do yardwork because he has a couple herniated discs in his back.  I don't want to do yardwork.  So what I do, I take $35/week out of his income to pay a yard guy to maintain my yard.  It is the exact same thing as my husband doing the yard.  Problem solved.
 

Alma the Younger's "conversion" story is amazing and inspiring.  When people bring it up as an example, I like to then reference Alma 5:45-46
After his visit from the angel, he still had to study, fast and pray to receive revelation through the Holy Ghost. Laman and Lemuel show us that angelic visits or rebukes do not necessarily lead to conversion.  It is really through the visitation of the Spirit due to having a broken heart and contrite spirit.  Or more accurately multiple visits.

I disagree that you have to give up on Church because of your wife.
Don't argue, don't fight.  But stand up for yourself.  This is what you do - tell the wife - in a non-heated, calm manner, the same way you would tell her that the mail just arrived... "I am going to Church on Sunday, I will be gone for 3 hours - from x to y.  If you like, I can take the baby with me so you can rest."  This shouldn't be presented as a request.  Rather, this should be presented as a Fact of Life.
Isn't the bishop your uncle, or something?  If I remember it correctly, then your uncle being upset is probably because he knows you can stand up for yourself and not jeopardize your marriage when it comes to your devotion to your Heavenly Father and you just haven't done so.
My advice to guys - most women respect a man who wouldn't allow them to treat as a doormat.

Both choices require perfect information, which many times is unobtainable.
So it can be a conundrum.

Don’t be unfair to the poster. Based on the information given, this was a decent answer. I happened to agree with it. 

On a whim I traveled from Reddit to MormonHub just to get a more relative perspective for various topics I was reading about and it appears that this thread I created over half a year ago gained quite a bit of attention. 
I save my login and passwords for everything so I had no trouble accessing my account again. The replies here are really thought provoking and interesting so much appreciated. As a brief update I did end things with my ex girlfriend. Which was almost 7 months ago. I found the situation to be impossible to move past. I was never going to feel comfortable with any level of friendship she had with the other guy especially considering the circumstances of the proximity they would have. It was the toughest thing I have ever had to do and it took me a long while to do so after a lot of helpful advice from my own friends and family to finally end it. But I thank the Lord I did. I may have been fully committed but my ex unfortunately couldn't be. With everything said and done I am content with life and moving forward with the direction the Lord wants me to go. 
I still yearn almost to be in another relationship because of the intense happiness that is felt being able to open yourself up to another person in the way I did, but this longing is conditional on being in a relationship where our boundaries are compatible hence why I must take my time and be patient. I pray you are all well and are blessed till the end of days. 

No, I have not.
Diversity is not strength.  UNITY of VALUES among a diverse group of people - especially that which is centered on Christ - is where the strength lies... that's how you approach Zion and become ready for the full application of the law of consecration.

I find it hard to believe that they "were not full aware of the problem, or at least its widespread nature." 
The exact text in the Second Discussion booklet (printed 1986) is
Sure, this comes with the caveat
This is written in an official church publication that had to have gone through at least the Missionary Department, and likely the Correlation Department as well, both of which are chaired by members of the Quorum of the Twelve. 
So yeah, I'm having trouble buying that they weren't aware that we were pushing baptism before having taught all of the covenants we live by
 
* Tangential: I'm not necessarily opposed to proposing baptism before explaining all of the covenants.  Just struggling to believe that they weren't aware it was going on.

Unsurprisingly as the baptism invitation was written explicitly to-be-memorized in the discussion booklet in my day.

If you married someone in the expectation that he would make you happy, you are far off the mark.  In general, husbands are not entertainment committees.
i think you have a lot of growing up to do.
 
or maybe it’s hormones.
 
 

Don’t be unfair to the poster. Based on the information given, this was a decent answer. I happened to agree with it. 

How is there any sense of humor in this? 
Being called into the Bishop's office and being told that I should date this boy and use the idea of marriage at a later time to get to go on a mission. This was after I said that I had no desire to ever date him.  I was told to do it anyway and help him go on a mission.  I was 17.  My dad talked to the bishop about. He was sure that I heard it wrong. No. I didn't.  They had words about it.  My dad came out so upset and told that the church is true but some of people are not.

Glad you're doing better, but this marriage sounds like it never should have happened in the first place. 
Guys who get married, and go live with mommy and daddy, but still want to be married, shouldn't be married.  It doesn't matter how much better you're doing - he's either unable or unwilling to be a husband.  
I'm sorry.  

This article is ridiculous and nothing but lies. I can't see how anyone can be saying "some good points" and the like. No. They're not good points. They're garbage points based on lies.
It is. What other possible reason could there be for not exposing skin, cleavage, midriffs, thighs, etc.? Yes, there is more to modesty than that, but that is clearly and obviously the primary point. Duh.
No we weren't. It is, of course. But it's also a men's issue. The fact that men are more easily tempted by the visual is reality. So...duh.
It is. It always has been. I get told what I can and cannot wear everywhere I go. If I don't wear anything...I get arrested. I can't go into most gas stations without shoes or shirt. I can't wear ripped clothes or inappropriate logos to work. Etc. etc. And, may I add...DUH.
THEY ARE!
DUH!

President Oaks gets a lot of online hate for having observed, some time ago, that not all truths are useful.
But, he was right; and I think that principle has some applicability in the present discussion as well.  

Both choices require perfect information, which many times is unobtainable.
So it can be a conundrum.

I heard that the debates winner was Donald Trump!