Suzie

I couldn't avoid reading your comment without looking at your avatar lol.

@beefche You have inspired me to try new recipes. Your macaroni and cheese recipe became one of my family's favorites. Now, a "veganized" version of it, hope it does not offend you. Thanks for such wonderful recipes.

They sound like teenagers.

*gulp*

@Just_A_Guy You're one of the greatest posters on this forum (besides me of course so relax). Seriously, it is a pleasure to debate with you even when we don't think alike in a few topics. I respect and appreciate your knowledge and I learn a lot from your posts. Wow, I sound like I am talking to my grandpa. @MarginOfError You're my twin of a different mother. I miss ya and your posts. Witty, smart and funny. Okay, okay...don't let it go to your head. @Wingnut Where are you?! I miss your posts and your ability to always remain calm during heated discussions. lol @LiterateParakeet You're a very kind soul. Very caring human being who sees the best in people. @MormonGator Very funny and always willing to understand others and never afraid to speak up. @Anddenex I don't know if you changed throughout the years or perhaps I changed or perhaps both but we get along now lol. I appreciate your knowledge and even though we might not agree in a lot of topics, I always look forward reading your thoughts. @SuzieYou're such a wonderful person, beautiful, intelligent, spiritual and most of all: HUMBLE. 😛

I am not a teenager (breaking news lol) but all over social media, I cannot recall the last time I have seen someone posting a selfie without the use of some sort of filter. Did you guys notice, too?

@NeuroTypicalI appreciate this. I really do. Not because I think I am "right" and others are "wrong" but because you took the time to understand my points. Thank you.

It's funny how the condemnation of the individual Vs. behaviour seems to be only when Bishop is concerned. Because to be completely honest, no one seems to have gotten that memo when they made/make horrible comments online about her. I understand people are upset about the recording in sacrament meeting etc, but they are treating her actions WORSE than what Bishop actually confessed he did. The comments I read about the allegations are dismissive, sort of "Yes, what he did was wrong but he will pay for it etc..." end of the conversation. Opposite to the great length that people are going to in order to discredit her and bash her for recording in sacrament meeting. And to be very clear, I do not support at all her choice of going to sacrament meeting and doing this. I think she is a broken person in many ways which makes (in my view) what Bishop did, even more repugnant giving his position of trust.

You might want to go off the tangent and make the issue about condemning person VS. behaviour, but let's remain on the real topic. This man was a predator in a position of trust and needs to be called as it is regardless of who they are. A confession that sounds bad but it otherwise kind of unclear?. Which part of "MTC President asked a sister missionary to expose her breasts" is unclear? I am seriously asking. This is according to his own confession.

Thank you for sharing this statement NeuroTypical. The first one was horrendous.

We don't know all the facts, I agree but we DO know (according to him) that he asked her to expose her breasts. I haven't seen online many comments condemning that someone in a position of TRUST would do such a thing. Instead, MOST of the comments I have read are targeted towards her and her past. But no one bats an eye if Bishop asked a young missionary (who was serving the Lord!) to expose her breasts. Yes, I am a bit- tiny upset.

Of course, but it does not stop anyone from condemning the actions from Bishop (his own confession). However, I have read many cruel comments about the former sister missionary. The disparity is appalling.

The line running directly between Jew and Gentile refers to the physical location separating Missouri from Indian Territory (to the west). You can read more here: https://history.lds.org/article/doctrine-and-covenants-land-of-zion?lang=eng

My take is a little different. I feel very bad for all parties and families involved. Having said that, I didn't like the Church statement. I think Eric Hawkins could have done a better job at phrasing it. It sounded like an angry statement to me which I think it was not necessarily given the nature of the allegation. But what I am upset the most, is the fact that the Bishop allegedly made some sort of confession to the police and another woman came forward with more allegations. And yet, even though this man confessed asking this missionary to expose her breasts to him no one bats an eye. If he has been living a lie for all these years, who is to say he did not in fact rape her? Of course, it is pure conjecture but you get my point. I'm upset that all I see online about this case is condemnation towards her, people choosing to dig about her past, condemnation at the fact that she recorded the public shaming in sacrament meeting, etc and YET I have NOT seen online the SAME amount of condemnation about the CONFESSION of this Bishop. Disappointing to say the least.

I would like to add my two cents. I believe it is imperative to accept the fact that some aspects of LDS history or things that past Church leaders have said or taught can be seen as puzzling, disturbing, dark, false or even completely nuts. The list isn't that extensive but there is enough to cause faithful members to question a lot of things. I think it is important for all of us to be understanding and reach out to anyone who might be struggling with these topics. Personally, I do not believe it is the responsibility of the Church to teach the members ALL the aspects of LDS history. I think the Church is right now in a position of "damned if they do, damned if they don't". We could argue all day whether the Church is the one to blame for this perception BUT now the essays are out. Is it good enough? Probably not, but I applaud the effort (yes, even if some people think it was due to the internet). I am not sure if it was mentioned, but the Church has been trying to COME TO TERMS with its own history just like the rest of members. Some aspects are hard to digest, and to be completely honest, I think there are some aspects that probably the Church does not feel very proud of. Having said that, if I was a new investigator having my first or second missionary discussion I am not sure if I would like to know Smith was married to multiple wives or that Blacks did not hold the Priesthood until 1978. I would shut down the discussion/visits immediately. The Church could share right now (very openly) all these topics to our new (green) members or even investigators. But what will exactly be accomplished? We need to accept that in order to understand history, we need to understand context and cultural differences. Presenting facts for the sake of just sharing information without fully understanding the consequences that might have in the lives of impressionable minds is a little irresponsible and uncaring IMO. I believe a member should be well-seasoned in their testimony and faith in order to start understanding some aspects of LDS history. I fully understand and support the need for more of these topics to be discussed openly among the membership, not sure how can it be done. I am just concerned that a lot of our members are not seasoned enough in history to present these facts in the way they are ought to be presented. Maybe a course could be provided? Having said that, for the poster who needed answers. Please post your questions here and I will try to answer them. I don't know a whole lot but I will try my best.

Well that's the FUN part. 😛

I didn't know @Anddenex and I had any differences in the past, I'm serious! Maybe things got a little tense in a thread? lol It's all good, I will have to make some forum searches. haha Thanks for the comment. I will be back shortly, my job is driving me crazy.

Of course! But FRESH pineapple (no canned)

Eating mushrooms is like eating snails. No thanks.

I assume this is personal revelation about your future life? then do you mind to explain what do you mean by "that science couldn't explain" part?

Just a question Gator, would you call this friend "Princess" ? And how Mrs.LadyGator would feel if you do?

That's flirty in ANY language brother.

Do you mind typing the word?

Well, it was coming... And I think one (if not the major factor) is that the members always struggled with it. For years and years. Like we need some training sessions from Jehovah Witnesses.

Hi vitaminwater120, what seems to be obvious to you doesn't seem to be that obvious to her. If she says that "the feeling isn't there", it means she is not interested in you in a romantic way. Time to look elsewhere. There are millions of LDS women who fit the exact same description and I am sure they will be the right match for you. I know it sucks, but unfortunately no matter how cool we are, how intelligent, and amazing we might be, if the other person doesn't feel the same for us it is a super clear indicator that we need to move on. Using logic won't work. Convincing her and later on getting hurt will make things worse for you. Wish you the best.