JudoMinja

Now I need to change my avatar and write short grammatically incorrect posts so I can confuse you.

Don't blame the church. You need to recognize that there are going to be bad apples in attendance. People aren't perfect, and the gospel is there for the sinners more than the righteous. You've been through a terrible experience, and it is going to take time for your heart to mend. That mending will happen best if you allow the Savior to help. You've learned a very sad but important lesson about trusting people. You have to be careful in giving your trust. But even when you exercise the most extreme care, there are going to be some con-artists who know how to "play the game". You are blessed that this ended quickly and that lying was all this man did to you. I know that may be hard to see now, but it could have been much worse. Now is a good time to remember that when we go through trials and hard times, the only way it will have meaning is if we strive to learn something from it so that the experience makes us stronger, wiser, and more compassionate toward others. As you allow your heart time to heal, see if your experience can help you look upon others with a keener insight and Christ-like compassion. Also remember, that doing everything right does not mean we will not experience pain and suffering. Holding ourselves to the commitments we make with the lord does not offer any guarantee that our life will be wonderful or fit into any sort of plan we have for ourselves. The Lord has his own plan, and that plan includes experiences that will offer us a chance to grow spiritually through suffering. This experience can be for your good- if you will make it so. Dig deeper for spiritual answers, for spiritual strength, for the ability to trust and love and forgive. I believe that you must be a strong woman for the Lord to have given you this trial- and you can become stronger still as you turn to Him. You will not lose out on the promised blessings for your righteousness. They will come. Perhaps not in the time or way you envision it, but they will come. Keep your firm grip on the iron rod, continue to hold true to your covenants, and you will be blessed. I know it, and I will have you in my prayers.

I whole-heartedly agree with this. Exceptions are and should remain rare, while divorce itself is nowdays common. Not everyone who's been through a divorce really fits into one of those exceptions. I think it is far too common for people to give up when more could have been done, when they should have been sticking it out through the "worst". People in general do not take commitments as seriously as we used to. This ties in to the whole concept of ones "word" and what it is worth. In the Book of Mormon, there's a battle where the Lamanites end up surrounded by the Nephites. The Nephites stop the battle to talk terms of surrender, and one of their terms was that the Lamanites give their word that they would not ever come to battle against the Nephites again. The leader refused to give his word because he knew he would break it. The battle continued and after that leader was killed, the rest of the remaining living Lamanites were given the opportunity to surrender again. These gave their word and were allowed to leave the battlegrounds. Every time I read this part I find myself absolutely amazed. Something like this would never happen in todays world. It would be absolute naivity and stupidity to take someone at their word for anything. Commitments, vows, covenants... they just don't have the same strength they used to. The only way we can get such strength back is by holding up our end- not commiting to something we won't keep. Marriage truly is sacred. It is a covenant, a bond, a promise... that isn't meant to be broken. There was a time when people would die rather than break their word. I see two important things to learn from this and that we will hopefully all teach our children so that they can make better decisions than we have- 1- Be extremely careful what commitments you make. This was my biggest mistake going into my own marriage. I let my hormones make my decisions instead of my brain and the spirit. I ignored signs and spiritual promptings that should have made it obvious I needed to walk away and never make any commitment to my ex. This put me in a position where I ended up making a promise I couldn't keep. I sure tried my hardest. I put up with hell, and only left for safety reasons. 2- Hold out stronger, longer, and harder on the commitments you do make. Keeping your word is far more important than we realize. We should be doing everything in our power to make sure any promise we make is never broken. We are capable of more than we realize, if we will just hold out through the hard times with faith and hope that we will come out stronger. That if we hold tight to our vows and covenants in the darkness, such will lead us to the light. While I consider my situation one of those rare exceptions where divorce was the better, safer, and more correct choice than remaining in a marriage, I also know that I am not faultless. I may have been a victim, but I had been careless in giving my word, in giving myself, and I'd ignored the spirit. If it weren't for the availability of the atonement and forgiveness, I'd be condemned right along side my broken marriage. I was in the wrong as much as my ex. What led to the decision to divorce was not something I could avoid stop or change, but if I'd been more careful about stepping into marriage in the first place it never would have been an issue. There are certain things people should never have to endure, but we should also recognize that no marriage- no person- is perfect. Those of us who've been through divorce could likely have exercised more patience, more forgiveness. And we all need to be more realistic, instead of expecting our relationships to fit into some kind of ideal fantasy. It's going to take work. It's going to be hard at times. But our word should be strong. If everyone held to their commitments with the same strength, exercised the same patience and long-suffering, and worked to improve their own character I think we'd see far less divorce. While I strive to be more understanding of those who've been through it since I've experienced it myself, I think divorce is a blight on our society. It is a symptom of the real disease- the loss of morality and whatever aspect of character it is that made our word mean something.

It confused me when his avatar mimicked annes, but now that it mimicks mine I don't get confused. I know where I've posted and what I've said, so when I see it come up I know its him. It's amusing, but yes. Confusing. Maybe we should put up our suggestions for good slamjet avatars? I like this one-

I went through all this questioning too, especially right after leaving my ex. I was going through counseling, reading everything I could get my hands on about abuse- what it looks like and how to avoid it, etc.- and just putting myself psychologically back together again. I went through months of PTSD and as I started gaining a better understanding of what I'd been put through- how it happens, why it happens, what I should have watched for, better ways I could have reacted, how I could prevent it happening again... I also started questioning everything else around me. I started looking at my relationships with others and was thinking- well that seems abusive, that is the same thing or similar to what my ex would do to control me, that brings up my fear again... Are all these things abuse too? Was I abused as a child and didn't even realize it and that's why I married an abuser? I was so confused. I had to look inward to find my answers. I had to make comparisons between what I'd experienced that was unhealthy and what I knew to be healthy. I looked at the result of my relationships, and realized that while those around me certainly did things that could be construed as abusive from time to time, I had developed a strong sense of character and independence through those relationships. While my relationship with my ex tore that apart. That is why it is so difficult to define a particular action as abusive. When my mother yelled at me it wasn't abuse, but when my ex yelled at me it was. What was the distinction? What was the difference? You have to look at the whole picture. My relationship with my mother is strong and healthy. When she yells, I understand why. It doesn't destroy my sense of self-worth. It may even build it, depending on the circumstances. Because her attitude and parenting as a whole was and is good. She allowed me the freedom to exercise my agency and be my own person, and encouraged me to grow and pursue success. My relationship with my ex was quite the opposite. When he yelled, I never knew why. It berated, belittled, confused and frightened me. It destroyed my self-esteem. His whole attitude and demeanor was dominating and controlling. I was given no freedom, was expected to not think for myself, had to conform to his ideals or suffer extreme and harsh punishments. If you don't have something normal and good to compare an unhealthy relationship to, it is even harder to make the distinction between something that is permissable and something that is not. I think those raised as children in abusive homes have it far worse than those like myself- because I can compare the wrong I experienced to the good of my relationship with my parents. Someone who's parents abused them has nothing to compare, nothing to juxtapose. For someone in such a situation trying to figure out what abuse looks like, I would say to look inward. Do you feel confident, strong, capable, enlightened, free? When there are problems in your relationship, because all relationships will have their bad moments- even the good ones, do you come out on the other side with a sense that you've been able to compromise and maintain your integrity? Then, I would say the relationship is not abusive. But if you are in a relationship that is causing you to doubt yourself, fills you with uncertainty, a lack of confidence, guilt, pressure, saddness, depression, fear, etc. Then I would say it is very possible you are experiencing abuse. For me, forgiveness for my ex means I no longer feel bitter or angry. I have no desire to see him suffer but rather want him to find healing and to succeed. I want him to be happy, as much as anyone else. That doesn't mean I want to see him again. Doesn't mean I trust him or am no longer afraid of him. You don't have to have a relationship with someone who's hurt you to forgive them. You don't have to let them back into your life. Forgiveness does not mean exposing yourself to the possibility of further abuse. Ideally, I won't ever see my ex again, and if I do it better be a public setting and I will expect him to maintain his distance. There is nothing wrong with maintaining limits and barriers to protect your sanity and safety. What matters is how you feel toward the individual. If you've forgiven them, you will feel a Christ-like outpouring of desire that they find healing and happiness.

I personally find this inaccurate. I cannot think of anywhere that it conclusively states Adam's mortal existence started or that the Fall occurred around 6,000 years ago. The closest we get to a direct statement that the earth itself will exist for about 7,000 years is D&C 77:6-7, but even this seems like it could be talking about a different measurement of time or that it may be using the terms "continuance" and "temporal existence" more in an attempt to describe to works and purposes of the earth than its actual calendar life-span. The uncertainty of the actual meaning of these numbers and time measurements in the accounts of the creation in Genesis, Moses, and Abraham grows when you start comparing all the cross references- some of them talking about the time of the creation, some of the plan for our entire time-span of mortality, and some of the events of the second coming and the end of the measurement of time. Some other factors to consider in your question: Science can only accurately measure what is right in front of us. Whenever we take the very accurate conclusions we reach in doing measurements in a lab and/or with something we can easily directly observe and then try to extrapolate our conclusions outward, we are doing so with many assumptions that data will rely on certain consistancies. However, we've seen with the attempts to make scientific predictions that the further forward we extrapolate something the more innaccurate our results become. We can tweak our formulae to account for these differences, but such takes time, patience, and mistakes. The same thing happens when we try to extrapolate backwards in time, so it is quite possible that our DNA "evidence" is not as accurate as we think it is. How we define "man" is also important. We believe Adam was the first "man", but what exactly does this mean? If God used evolutionary processes for creation, whether Adam was the result of that evolution or created separately, then there would have most certainly been other "like-man" creatures on the earth at the time of the Fall. The lack of death may have applied only to that which was in the Garden or may be referencing the first spiritual creation- that all things were created in spirit before created physically/temporally. Like you, I've developed my own personal view concerning our creation through careful study of our scriptural accounts and of science, looking for where they correlate and connect. I too still have some holes in my thoughts and theories, but I believe we will get the closest and most accurate understanding we can possibly reach through careful comparisons and cross-referencing between all the scriptural accounts and our current scientific discoveries.

This sounds awesome! I can't wait to see how the show turns out. I've always enjoyed "roughing it", and always found it so very disappointing that our Young Women camp outs weren't as rigorous as the Boy Scout camp outs. I have so many stories...

I agree with this except for what I bolded. I don't care so much about others agreeing with me as I do about them at least understanding my views/opinions. That is why it is the "brick walls" with which I get frustrated. I've had many conversations with people who completely disagree with me, and I don't have any problem with that. Several of them have been on this board and I consider those conversations, in particular, to be very memorable and enlightening because I've gained a better understanding of a different way to see things, as well as come o a better understanding of my own views- further rooting me in the greater strength of my personal opinions. In this light, I think I actually prefer conversations with people with whom I disagree- so long as that person is open, enlightening, informative, and understanding.

Actually, I think PC is spot on there. I know that the reason my ex was violent was because he didn't know any better way to do it. That speaks of poor relationship skills, combined with a lack of self-control and warped sense of reality. He had an ideal in his mind of how marriage was supposed to work, how a wife was supposed to act, and when things didn't work the way he saw it in his mind he would get confused, panicky, angry, and instead of facing reality would try to make reality match what was in his head. He had no good example to follow, never new what it was like to have/see a good healthy relationship. How is one to learn good relationship skills without a good example? I know that my ex wants to be better and probably could become a better man with some very intensive rehabilitation and counseling. At some point in his life, I sincerely hope that he does get the help he needs. I've seen and talked with several others who were once like him and have gone through the healing power of counseling and the atonement and come out better people. I like them, trust them, can talk with them easily. I consider them my friends. However, I'm also with slamjet in that my ability to trust and have a good relationship with my ex is just absolutely broken. Even if he were to go through everything he needed to do to completely turn his life around, even though I have forgiven him... Our relationship can never be fixed. It passed a point where I, emotionally, would be completely incapable of healing with him. The fear of him has become an ingrained part of my being that no amount of kindness, softness, or change could fix.

This supports what you are saying here, specifically the bolded: ""And it came to pass that the God of heaven looked upon the residue of the people, and he wept; and Enoch bore record of it, saying: How is it that the heavens weep, and shed forth their tears as the rain upon the mountains? And Enoch said unto the Lord: How is it that thou canst weep, seeing thou art holy, and from all eternity to all eternity?... The Lord said unto Enoch: Behold these thy brethren; they are the workmanship of mine own hands, and I gave unto them their knowledge, in the day I created them; and in the Garden of Eden, gave I unto man his agency; And unto thy brethren have I said, and also given commandment, that they should love one another, and that they should choose me, their Father; but behold, they are without affection, and they hate their own blood;... But behold, their sins shall be upon the heads of their fathers; Satan shall be their father, and misery shall be their doom; and the whole heavens shall weep over them, even all the workmanship of mine hands; wherefore should not the heavens weep, seeing these shall suffer?" Moses 7:28-29, 32-33 & 37 Apparently, to a certain extent, we choose our father, just as we choose everything else. In that sense, we will all become as our "father", because our father is the one whom we exemplify, follow, and strive to mimic. We draw near unto the Lord, or we draw near unto Lucifer. Either way... we become like our father.

I believe the point of that is that it is inapproriate to instill fear in another at all. Looks, actions, gestures, property destruction, etc are all methods that can be used to instill fear (among others). But no matter how you do it, it is wrong to instill fear in another. There's nothing wrong with explaining and carrying out the proper consequences for sins and misdeeds. The problem here is threats, especially if used to try and get someone to conform to what you want when they haven't, in reality, done anything wrong. For example, my ex used to threated to call the police on me and/or put me in a psych ward when I started getting loud or wouldn't cooperate with what he wanted during an argument. This of course mixed with emotional manipulation- making it seem like I was the one who was wrong and/or crazy, when really I was the one who could have legitimately called the police for what he was doing. I refused to do so or even threaten to do so, because I didn't like the warped defensive feeling it caused me when he did it to me. The threat was a tactic to get me to quiet down so the neighbors wouldn't call the cops and/or to get me to give in and do/say what he wanted. This is quite different from telling a child what the consequences for their actions will be or trying to instill in them a moral compass by explaining the wrongness of sin. The "rules" here do identify a very fine line that can be difficult to see if you don't have any direct experience with it. That line really all boils down to "how" you do something and the intent behind it, which is very difficult to identify and measure. Do you use intimidation to get your spouse/children to do what you want? Or do you use reasoning, patience, and long-suffering to help them to choose what is right? Do you use isolation to keep them from influences that might cause them to resist you? Or do you instill in them good decision making skills so that they can properly limit the influences they allow into their lives themselves? Do you use threats to get your spouse/children to be afraid of resisting you? Or do you teach them the natural order of choices and accountability by letting them make small mistakes and learn from them so that they will have their own understanding of morals/laws/ethics and exercise self-control out of a desire to be good instead of fear? The intimidation, isolation, threats, etc are all methods of cruelty and force to maintain power and control. While the patience, reasoning, discipline, rules, teaching, etc are all methods of love and kindness that will build self-confidence, and help others progress in their independence. An abusive person wants a spouse/child that will be dependant and submissive to his/her will and never decide anything contrary to what he/she wants. A non-abusive person will want their spouse/child to be independent and capable of making their own decisions. So- Telling someone God disapproves of their behavior or that they will suffer jail time for continuing with a certain action or decision could or could not be abusive. It all depends on whether you are doing it in an intimidating manner to maintain control or whether you are doing it in a loving manner to help teach them right from wrong and improve their decision making skills so that they can be independent.

Freedom to choose does not mean freedom from suffering consequences. And the consequences of some actions are very far reaching and long lasting. Consequences are also "unbiased" in that they affect everyone- even for generations- even those who never sinned. Repentance, also, does not mean freedom from suffering consequences. Repentance relieves us of the spiritual guilt and responsibility (when utilized properly) but does not change the nature of what has happened, will not reverse the results of our choices. This is why so many scriptures speak of visiting the sins of the fathers upon the children. There's a perfect example in the Book of Mormon- Laman and Lemuel chose to reject the teachings of their father and brother and to turn to a life of sin. Their choice had far reaching affects for generations, leading to the suffering of the Lamanite people- lost without the word of God, and to the warring between the Lamanites and Nephites. The Lamanites were certainly free to choose and free to repent, and many of them did so. But that does negate all the years and generations of suffering that resulted from the actions of two people. Divorce is one of those actions that leads to unavoidable consequences and suffering that will affect generations. It doesn't matter what choices the divorced individuals make, whether they remarry or not, whether they repent or not. Certain things, as a result of the divorce, are just irreversible.

Snow, I know from past discussions with you and reading your posts that you are a very intelligent, educated and faithful person. I respect your belief and conclusions concerning the existence of Satan though I disagree. And it is because I respect you that I am honestly and sincerely curious how you interpret this scripture: "And behold, others he flattereth away, and telleth them there is no hell; and he saith unto them: I am no devil, for there is none—and thus he whispereth in their ears, until he grasps them with his awful chains, from whence there is no deliverance." 2 Nephi 28:22 Do you simply feel that the use of the term "devil" is symbolic here? Maybe that it is referring to teachings that we can do no evil because there is no innate moral law of right and wrong? I think I can see how it would be symbolic, since verse 20 says "at that day shall he rage in the hearts of the children of men" which could just mean that people themselves turn to more devilish deeds as they set their hearts on their lusts and carnal desires. It just seems so clear to me, in our teachings, that the very person Satan/Lucifer/the Devil/the Son of the Morning is real and involved in our lives. Just as Jesus, the Holy Ghost, and our Father in Heaven are real and involved in our lives. So I would like to understand better how you've reached your conclusions to the contrary while still holding yourself to a strong faith in our Father in Heaven and in our Savior Jesus Christ.

The official church stance on divorce is that it is wrong and should not be done, with some rare exceptions being taken into account. Someone who divorces for reasons not addressed in these exceptions who then remarries would be considered under the condemnation described in the Bible. As it concerns temple sealings- it is very difficult to get a sealing cancelation. There are cases where one remarries but is not sealed to their new spouse, because a sealing cancelation would not be granted for their first marriage. Cases like this are handled on an individual basis, and we believe that all will be set aright when Christ comes again. There are many talks from our leaders which address the topic of divorce. Most of them explain how morally wrong we find it and urge couples to work out the problems in their marriages instead of getting divorced. In more recent years, however, several of these talks have begun to address those cases where there may be exceptions. In particular, I want to quote a talk from Dallin H. Oaks: "There are many good Church members who have been divorced. I speak first to them. We know that many of you are innocent victims—members whose former spouses persistently betrayed sacred covenants or abandoned or refused to perform marriage responsibilities for an extended period. Members who have experienced such abuse have firsthand knowledge of circumstances worse than divorce. When a marriage is dead and beyond hope of resuscitation, it is needful to have a means to end it. I saw examples of this in the Philippines. Two days after their temple marriage, a husband deserted his young wife and has not been heard from for over 10 years. A married woman fled and obtained a divorce in another country, but her husband, who remained behind, is still married in the eyes of the Philippine law. Since there is no provision for divorce in that country, these innocent victims of desertion have no way to end their married status and go forward with their lives. We know that some look back on their divorces with regret at their own partial or predominant fault in the breakup. All who have been through divorce know the pain and need the healing power and hope that come from the Atonement. That healing power and that hope are there for them and also for their children. Now I speak to married members, especially to any who may be considering divorce. I strongly urge you and those who advise you to face up to the reality that for most marriage problems, the remedy is not divorce but repentance. Often the cause is not incompatibility but selfishness. The first step is not separation but reformation... A couple with serious marriage problems should see their bishop. As the Lord’s judge, he will give counsel and perhaps even discipline that will lead toward healing. Bishops do not counsel members to divorce, but they can help members with the consequences of their decisions. Under the law of the Lord, a marriage, like a human life, is a precious, living thing. If our bodies are sick, we seek to heal them. We do not give up. While there is any prospect of life, we seek healing again and again. The same should be true of our marriages, and if we seek Him, the Lord will help us and heal us. Latter-day Saint spouses should do all within their power to preserve their marriages... Whatever the outcome and no matter how difficult your experiences, you have the promise that you will not be denied the blessings of eternal family relationships if you love the Lord, keep His commandments, and just do the best you can." (April 2007 General Conference)

I understand and share your passion, which does make this a bit of a difficult topic to cover objectively. I feel for those who have been through situations similar to my own, and especially feel for those who were subjected to it for long periods of time. It really wears away at you, and when it sounds like someone might be lacking in understanding it triggers a gut defensive reaction. I never meant to imply that emotional abuse isn't bad. Just that I don't see much of a point in making comparisons between emotional and physical. It all blends together. No matter what the abuse is, it's wrong and damaging. We could argue over the semantics, what we feel is worse, or how the damage is done- but there's no point in digging either of our wounds any deeper. We've both been there. However, the phrase "emotional abuse" is also getting very overused in todays world, and I think it is largely because we all do things to each other that could be seen as emotional abuse. So, the OP actually brings up a very good question. Where is the line? When do you know if it is truly emotioal abuse and not just someone who has a tendancy to be a little manipulative, or someone being childish or selfish, etc? People who've been through it, like you and me, have a natural tendancy to become protective when the topic is brought up. But emotional abuse is just not as easy to define as physical. That's part of the reason it's harder to find help or convince a court it is happening. Being harder to define doesn't make it worse. It doesn't make it less. But it does mean that there will be people who claim they're being emotionally abused who aren't, and that there will be people who are being emotionally abused and have no idea they are. That is why I suggested the book Emotional Blackmail in my first post. It identifies the range of things people do to emotionally get control of situations and others, even if they aren't being abusive. It also identifies ways you can respond that will help you set boundaries and maintain control of your own life and decisions so that any emotional blackmail you are put through does not cross the line into abuse.

Hi there Fixing. I know you've certainly gotten quite a share of humble pie here, but I'm hoping to help here if I can. I can understand where you are coming from. I'm at a point where my weight isn't what it should be, and am struggling to get it back under control for my health. Right now, I'm starting to see the beginnings of some ill effects like asthmatic symptoms, high blood pressure, a weakened immune system, troubles sleeping, early onset arthritis, depression, and a risk of diabetes. It's hard to find the time, motivation, positive attitude, and methods to get my weight back under grips. Diet and exercise that have worked in the past don't seem to do anything, its harder to try new things or get a regular schedule for my exercise, or even to eat healthy when my time is already so filled up and wrapped around work and child care. You love your wife, shared this struggle, got yours under control and are concerned about her. The problem with your posts though, what seems to be causing the adverse reaction in those trying to offer you advice, is that you don't say anything about noticing any problems with your wife's health. You say you are concerned about her health, but it sounds more like a cover, because instead of saying something like "she seems more and more short of breath lately, doctor says her cholesterol and blood pressure are getting high, she gets sick easily, she's having digestion problems, etc" - all things related to health or signs of her weight becoming a problem for her health- your chief complaints have to do with losing interest in her and feeling unattracted to her. That's okay. You're being honest, and you recognize that your lack of attraction in your wife is also a problem. Attraction is an important part of love and marriage for many people and is recognized as a pretty high ranking emotional "need" for some. But you can't complain about losing attraction for your spouse and then say you are just concerned about her health. These are two separate issues, no matter that they are connected in a similar cause. When you say it is about her health, it sounds like you are looking for people to give you advice about what to tell your wife to do and/or how to convince her to start showing more interest in losing weight and putting forth the effort to take care of herself - to get her to also become concerned enough about her health to change. Such advice would be good and would likely be given if you voiced evidence actually related to her health. From what you've posted though, it sounds more like her health isn't really an issue right now and just could become an issue if her weight gets worse. As it is, the fact that you've been "brutally honest" with your wife and told her that you're losing interest in her physically and that other women have shown an interest in you since you've lost weight means that deep down, she knows the problem isn't her health either. The problem is, you don't find her attractive. For some, that motivates them to become more proactive and do everything they can to remain attractive. For others, it just makes them depressed. And your wife being tired, reading romance novels, and showing no interest in losing weight sounds like a depressed woman. Depression causes more problems, because it will also cause you to gain weight, and then it just circles in on itself. If you are really concerned about your wife's health, which I think you are but it's more a sideline issue right now, you need to realize that your lack of attraction is compounding the issue, feeding a depression, and causing her more harm than good. If she is going to lose weight, she has to first overcome her depression, which means you need to first overcome your lack of attraction. The first step to solving your problem is in you, not your wife. I know you see the problem in you, or your adulterous thoughts wouldn't be frightening you and all this humble pie wouldn't be making you feel so guilty. But you're trying to fix your wife before fixing you, which just isn't going to happen. You need to find it in yourself to be attracted to your wife, no matter her weight. Weight fluctuates. Physical beauty fluctuates. Especially in women. There are going to be days, years even, when she looks downright ugly. But if you can't be attracted to her despite that, if you start entertaining interest in other women, start flirting with even the thought of infidelity, then you are going to have problems. You need to see the beauty in her the way she is right now. If she were to be burned and marred, broken and maimed, old and saggy- you need to find her beautiful. Attraction is only partially hormonal and ingrained. The rest is a choice. You need to choose it. Flee from all thoughts that stray from your wife. Love her. Cherish her. Don't push the weight/health issue on it. She knows about her health. She'll take care of it when she has the time, motivation, and confidence in herself to do so. Right now, focus on taking care of the part of this issue that is in you. As you said, your best route to get started on that is counseling. Your bishop should have the information for LDS counselors, or you can easily look up other counseling services in your local area in your phonebook or online. These people have the knowledge and training for helping you identify how to rebuild your sense of attraction better than anyone here can help. I wish you the best and hope you can find the help you need. For your sake, your wife's sake, and your marriage's sake.

The only one who should advise someone to abstain from sacrament is the bishop. You can decide for yourself that you shouldn't take the sacrament over something you've done, but it is never your place to extend such decisions/judgement over another. In your example, the member who told the person not to partake was in the wrong. The decision to partake or not partake of the sacrament is up to the individual and/or the bishop. Nobody else.

Iggy- I do not disagree with you. I merely meant to point out that physical abuse includes more than the bodily harm. It is just as psychologically damaging as other forms of abuse, if not more so. Any psychological damage one suffers is going to be far harder to recover from than physical damage, yes. I've healed physically from things my ex did to me and have few lasting physical scars. The worst damage, from which I will likely never fully recover, is all in my head. But... The damage to my mind and emotions would not have been as deep and lasting if I'd never been physically struck. That the man I loved was willing to beat me with a cane, throw me into a wall, punch out my teeth, choke me until I blacked out, and come after me with a knife pushed me into a state of submission, fear, and depression far faster and harder than anything he did before it became physical. Once he took it that far, all he had to do was raise his voice in anger to put me in a state of fear for my life- which would never have been the case if he hadn't touched me because I wouldn't have believed him capable of taking my life. And I would venture a guess that your own psychological scars became much deeper and further entrenched once your ex started getting physical. Yes, you can show physical abuse to the police. Yes, people are more willing to believe you are being abused if you show them scars, bruises, broken bones, etc. That makes it easier to seek help. And if a person became physically abusive without first using the manipulative emotionally abusive tools to get someone under their thumb, those being beaten would be more willing to seek that help instead of hide it. I agree that psychological damage is far worse and longer lasting than physical damage. But I would not say that forms of emotional/verbal abuse are worse than forms of physical abuse, because they all cause psychological damage. Trust me. I speak from experience as well. I've also been in that mental state where fight/flight took over and all I could do was curl up in the fetal position in terror. I didn't reach that point though until after the abuse became physical. The physical abuse is just as mental as everything else, and is typically a culminating factor that more fully locks you under an abusers control, making you too afraid to question or resist. Would someone only emotionally abused experience that kind of fear? Maybe. But I doubt it. They may become depressed, subdued, submissive, confused, uncertain and unconfident, but I don't see any reason why an only emotionally abused person would be struck by true terror. This is why I think saying emotional abuse is worse than physical is inaccurate. More accurate would be to say that psychological scars are worse than physical scars- and physical abuse causes just as many psychological scars as other forms of abuse, really deepening already present scars and worsening the damage.

I don't know if I would say that, simply because the physical abuse is tightly interwoven with the psychological. Sure getting hit or choked or bitten etc is easy to recover from physically, but that physical act alone produces multitudes more psychological scarring than any other form of emotional abuse. My worst and most traumatising memories are of times my ex-husband physically hurt me and/or threatened to do so. If he'd never ever harmed me physically, I wouldn't have psychologically broken down as bad as I had. It was because I knew he wouldn't hold back, because I knew that he had no reservations when it came to doing me harm, that I became so terrified of him. It was because I knew that I had been lucky to live through some of our fights, when I started seeing signs that he was going to do the same to our child that I left. You cannot physically abuse someone without it having extremely adverse psychological effects. Yes, all the other emotional abuse is bad and leaves mental scarring that is hard to recover from, but it is easier to be resiliant and find ways to overcome someone who is just basically being manipulative than it is to face someone who you know will physically force you into submission. All that being said- We all do things to others that could be construed as emotional abuse. The key to determining whether it is a serious problem or not is in whether it is damaging your self-esteem and/or dominating your will. We all haggle and barter and put down and bargain and manipulate sometimes. It is when this happens without limits, where the manipulator is always winning and you are being overwhelmed and downtrodden, that you have a problem. Read Emotional Blackmail by Susan Forward. It will really help.

To me, the terms Liberal and Conservative are nothing more than labels that breed contention and strife. We see ourselves as two fighting and competing "sides" instead of a united people. I've never considered myself or anyone else subject to the confines of any labels, political or otherwise, and I strongly disagree with the use of a party system that perpetuates our separation on issues instead of finding common ground. I wouldn't even consider myself a moderate, because this is also a label meant to describe someone playing mediator or who is wishy-washy. Politics in general have always frustrated me, because I feel like everything is forced into becoming a competition and expected to fit into these labeled ideas that result in angry debates that stop progress and cooperation. We all have our own unique views and ideas concerning what is most important and how things should be run. We can pool these ideas together and develop better solutions for our national and world-wide problems if we would stop bickering and instead look for the good in everyone and their ideas. While we may lean in different directions, I've found that we all generally agree about what is important and ascribing a label to ourselves and/or others fosters arguments instead of comraderie.

I've been wanting to tell you that your new icon is confusing, and I guess this is the perfect spot to do so, thanks to this comment. :) I keep starting to read your comments as if you are anne, then get confused when you don't sound like her, then realize your icon is different, and go... "Oh, it's slamjet. Silly me."

Unfortunately there really are just some very disfunctional wards out there, and there isn't really much you can do about it, because you cannot change other people- you can only change yourself. I feel for you. I've grown up a member of the church and my father was in the military, so I've been to a number of different wards. Most of them are absolutely wonderful, but there are those bad apples. And even in the great ones there are going to be a few people who just make life difficult. It can be especially difficult when your life doesn't fit the "norm". I, for example, have recently been dealing with feeling ostrasized at church. I am a single parent of a small child, and we recently started a single's branch in our area. This means that if I continue going to my same ward, I'm basically the only single person there, and due to ward dynamics I'm also one of the only "poor" members. I was dealing with it fine, until the only sister who really took the time to befriend me moved. Since then, I'd been helping in the nursery instead of going to my classes until my mother suggested I take my son to the nursery of the ward that meets before the singles branch, so that he would be in nursery while I attended the singles branch sacrament. I decided to give it a try, but because I cannot stay after sacrament and everyone knows I have a child because I bring him to the family home evening activities, I tend to get treated coldly by several of the other singles. Despite it all, I decided I'm not there to make friends. I'm there to learn from the talks/lessons, partake of the sacrament, draw closer to God, and when possible to what I can to help others in my ward. I decided to transfer my records to the singles branch, because I am better able to focus on the sacrament talks, get some quiet time to read my scriptures before it starts, and it is a smaller group so even though it's hard to get along with some of them it is easier for me to find opportunities to try and break barriers and be of service. We recently had a special broadcast in my area from the General Relief Society President Sister Beck where she shared a story that really hit home for me. She told us about a young lady who moved to a new ward. She was a single parent, and when her records were transferred and she was introduced to the sisters in her Relief Society meeting the leadership commented that she was another one of "those" single parents and they didn't really need another one of "those". While this was certainly a cold and hurtful comment, especially coming from a member in a leadership position, this sister determined that she was going to put forth the effort to change the ward perception of single parents and overcome the negative labelling. She paid close attention to the announcements and the help lists that would get passed around, and she lept upon every opportunity to be of service to the other members of the ward. She made meals, visited people in the hospital, signed up for babysitting, etc. and eventually had an amazing effect on the members of her ward through her service and even became the Relief Society President. No matter your circumstances, no matter how others treat you, it is you who will determine the outcome of your experiences. You must decide how you are going to respond to the coldness and what you are going to do to overcome being shunned. Remember that Christ himself was shunned and mistreated, and his response was nothing more than to continue serving with meekness and kindness. Perhaps the ward isn't meant to be there for you right now- you are meant to be there for the ward. This is something I personally will be striving to work on, and whether I make an impact on others or not I know that my own character will have grown and become stronger and better for my efforts.

I think it is probably very typical for most marriages to have a rocky start with the first year being at least somewhat difficult, but this will depend on a variety of factors including (but not limited to)- How you and your spouse were raised The rockiness/calmness of your own parents' relationships Your age/maturity going into the marraige Your personal level of introspectiveness and perceptive skills Your communication skills and styles And of course the level of similarities and differences in all of these factors between you and your spouse.