carlimac

I stand corrected. I would bet many readers of headlines only make the same assumption I did. It makes the protest venue and the protest itself even more ridiculous. And God doesn't even hate gays. Those poor deluded Baptists. But, God loves the members of the Westboro Baptist church, too. So I guess there isn't much more anyone can say.

Tacky on the part of protestors. Would they like if people publically protested their children's indisgressions their funerals. It may be legal but in bad taste.

The interpretation of the Constitution has become so warped that it no longer has the same meaning it did when it was written. Our forefathers probably couldn't even fathom how distorted society would become.

LOL You give me far too much credit. He's not just my god. He is everyones God. You make it sound like heterosexuality and man-woman marriages are something just made up recently by Christians. Adam and Eve started the human race. And if you prefer evolution- even if amoebas can reproduce by splitting, it took girl and boy Neanderthals to perpetuate the human race. I'm not an expert on history or all different religions or ancient belief systems, but I do know that if there are any that from their very inceptions taught that homosexual marriages were the way to go, they are very very rare and probably never produced offspring to keep them going for more than one generation. What we have going with homosexual "marriages" is a perversion of nature. We (as human beings) have become so advanced ( in our own minds) and so cocky and full of ourselves that we think we can mess with nature and it's no big deal. But I'm quite sure that the creator of our spirits and bodies, our Heavenly Father, and all other gods- even Zeus himself if he exists, are pretty displeased with homosexual alliances. I'm not going to say if same gender attractions are engrained in DNA to the point of being something one cannot overcome. I'm not completely convinced of that. But I DO know it goes against all laws of nature for two of the same gender to pair up as they are and even more grievous to our Father in Heaven that they want to claim they are "families" with all the same rights as the original nuclear families created by Him. It's not just my opinion, not just a Christian hangup, and frankly not just a religious thing either. It's a societal issue. It's a human thing. It's immoral. Yes it is gradually being more accepted by society. Unfortunately I can't deny that. But being socially acceptable in these days does not equate "right". With all sincerity Soulsearcher, I'm sorry if this offends you. But it's simply the way things are. Whether it's deemed unconstitutional or not, DOMA is right and good and should be left alone.

I'm not making any legal argument at all. I'm speaking purely from MY religious point of view. I'm just repeating what the prophets have said and I believe them. It's as simple as that. I'm not going to argue this either because it's proven to be fruitless. I believe in the Gospel of Jesus Christ and the proclamation to the family. According to the Plan of Salvation which I believe is the plan created by OUR creator, marriage is between a man and a woman only.

It doesn't really need to be explained. All that's needed is our faith in the prophets of old and now. If we believe and follow them, we'll be protected. That's all the explanation I need.

Ha ha ha -plop! Seriously, the problem is not so much that hetero marriages would be destroyed immediately. (That happens all on it's own- selfishness being the biggest detriment.) But that the whole fabric of the family- the basic unit of society- will be weakened further. I feel like kids are in the greatest danger. Satan is at the top of his game when we are indifferent and casual about the prophets words. That flaxen cord thing... it's real!

Says you. That doesn't happen to be God's opinon though.

Ok, This bothers me. Why are we to give up the sacrament after we confess if it's not something to get excommunicated for. I would think we need to take the sacrament more than ever to renew our covenants- to recommit. I can see not taking the sacrament as long as the sin is still going on, but if it's not, what's the point? I know a young man- all too well- who had some issues. The bishop told him not to pass the sacrament and that went on for 4 months. I think it went on too long. He had quit what he was doing. I felt he was so in need of the spiritual boost the sacrament could give him. But the bishop was really into punitive punishment. I actually think making him abstain for so long did more damage than good. This kid became more withdrawn from the spirit during that time and I think it's because he felt like others were watching and judging him for so long. It wasn't until that bishop was released and a new clear headed one was called that this young man regained his peaceful countenance and the Spirit seemed to return. And why couldn't a person pray in a class if they were on probation? Honestly- does the Lord not hear those prayers? Does he just shut his ears to the sincere spiritual pleas of that person till the bishop says the Lord can start listening again? Seems counter to when the Lord says..."Come unto me". He never says go off in your corner and quit serving and doing good for others while you're repenting. I just don't get it.

Our Savior's Love Dearest Children Press Forward Saints The Spirit of God Redeemer of Israel

Had my last baby in my mid 40's. Sets me apart from almost every mom I know these days.

Wow. I guess it happens.

SAHM. Used to be a pediatric RN. Comes in handy during strep/flu season.

So what's the purpose of craving Fresca and A-1 sauce? LOL! Those were mine.

I know he's done this. We have gotten many letters and phone calls from people in his every one of his areas telling us how grateful they are for our son.

This is what I'm worried about. I don't think my son has personally given up, but he's not this bigger than life charismatic people motivator type. He's more of a cerebral, intellectual type than a people person. I think he actually does better one on one that leading a whole zone. He was a fabulous trainer for new elders and went through about 6 of them in a row. He's more likely to turn inward to scripture and prayer than to get out there and light a fire under the missionaries in his zone. I don't know what his companion is like for sure. My son said today he has a good companion but I get the impression the guy is bit overbearing- maybe blunt and insensitive. I think maybe the chemistry between them is just not working all that well. That's not a good thing for a zone. He never says anything really negative about his companion but one time mentioned something his mission president said when he first put them together. The mp said he didn't know why he felt impressed to form this companionship because they were so opposite. I hope if it was for these two elders to learn something from each other, they learn it quickly and then get separated soon so that my son has the chance to end on a more positive note. He's been in the zone a lot longer than his companion so logically he would be the one to get transferred, if at all.

My son has been out 20 months. He experienced a lot of success in the first part of his mission. Lots of discussions, many baptisms, etc. He's normally a very motivated and energetic kid. Not especially outspoken and takes himself and the work very seriously. But previously he felt enough success to keep him going. Now he's been in the same area for 6-7 months. And it's all dried up. He says he'll probably end up staying in this same area for the rest of his mission. I personally think he desperately needs a transfer. But he's a zone leader and says they don't transfer ZLs around very often. He's taking lots of heat from the local stake leaders about what the other missionaries are doing and about the lack of success in the area. He's taking it personally. Right now he should be at the top of his game. He is still doing everything he can think of to keep his zone going, to keep working and to be personally obedient. But they are in probably the hardest part of the mission- a very well-to-do area where folks don't think they need the Gospel or any other religious upgrade. He says out of 28 missionaries in the zone there are only 2 potential baptisms coming up. So what do I do as a parent? I'm praying like crazy, I'm trying to be encouraging and upbeat in my emails to him, I'm planning a day of fasting and temple work. What else? Do I write to the mission pres. asking him if he knows what's going on with our son? I don't think he's depressed or anything, just very discouraged. I hate the thought that he might end his mission not having had much success for the last 8-10 months of it. Experiences like that can have a lasting effect. My brother went to Denmark and didn't have any baptisms. It really soured him for awhile. And it took a huge toll on his self esteem, even though he was perfectly obedient and did everything he was supposed to. (By the way, my son reminds me so much of my brother! How coincidental that they are having similar experiences.) I know this kind of thing happens, and it can be a real character builder, but from what I've heard, other areas of the mission are more productive, humbler and more prone to having people who are looking for truth. It seems a wise mission president would mix things up a little more- spread the potential for success around among the missionaries. Apparently the mission president in on his last 4 months also after a very successful 2 3/4 years. He has apparently turned the mission around. But I hope at this point that he isn't losing focus himself on what is going on under his nose. Any suggestions?

Husband, kids, grandbaby, most of my relatives, dear friends, baby animals, the beautiful earth and really good Chinese food!

Well, that's your personal experience. I think it really depends on where you're from. I lived in SLC for my first 3 births and I had excellent education and preparation. Classes, tours, books and handouts, breathing practice with my husband, etc. With my first, we went calmly to the hospital- even after being told by the doctor that I was going to deliver THAT day- like it or not because I was developing pre-eclampsia (toxemia). I was 40+ weeks so it was time to get the baby out. There may be many women who aren't prepared because they choose not to be. ButI really believe most doctors in the US encourage women to learn all they can and attend birthing classes where available. If someone lives way out in the boonies hours from a hospital and classes, that's understandable if they can't get there. But with the internet and more literature than one could even get through, there is no excuse for being unprepared. I think both ways of giving birth are perfectly acceptable. There are pros and cons of home births and hospital births. The real tragedy is that women tend to judge each other and think their own way is the best. Every woman should be able to decide and not feel the least bit guilty for the way she chooses to deliver, pain meds or none, home or hospital, aunts uncles and cousins in attendance or just hubby and the doctor, or whomever she wishes to be there. It should be a personal decision aided even by spiritual promtings. Why don't we just back off each other and allow each other to be "empowered" by following our own personal intuition.

I know you're being sarcastic. I honestly think this is not a very common scenario. It's a Hollywood scenario but I really don't know anyone who went about it this way, except one of my YW leaders who gave birth in the car on the way. And another friend who didn't even make it out the door. In fact she didn't even have time to get undressed.

Well good for you for being completely honest, but I have a suspicion you would have thought differently after getting out there and serving. What you have the potential to gain from the experience far surpasses what you give. When you're on a mission you might have the chance to baptize people. You might not. But the opportunity to learn (not just church stuff) and to interact with so many people is a huge blessing. I hope you do have a chance to serve a mission at some point.

Why oh brother Pam? It's straight out of the Book of Mormon.

Actually, this is an interesting concept. Obviously it would never work as the op described. But what if a congregation heard the true gospel of Jesus Christ without the title of a particular church being attatched to it? Think of a blindfold taste test where the taster doesn't know the brand. So if people heard the gospel without knowing they were being taught the Mormon brand (for lack of a better description) of doctrine and with the spirit that accompanies the teaching of truth, I wonder if more people would accept it that way. There are so many preconceived ideas that folks have about "Mormons" that they are biased from the get-go. There is a story in a new book out by Gerald Lund that I just read about this very thing happening. It was just one woman rather than a whole congregation. Once she realized what she was hearing was from the LDS church, she accepted the missionaries in and was baptized. The whole deception thing wouldn't work, but the idea behind it is one to ponder.

What exactly do you mean by "not a medical event"? Of course it's a medical event. How could it not be? Even getting a scratch that requires only a bandaid is a medical event. Had my daughter not had intervention with her childbirth, she and her baby would most likely be dead. I was there- saw the whole thing. She pushed for three hours straight. Baby was posterior and stuck. Even with manipulation, they couldn't get him out without forceps and a major episiotomy. I think it's just pure snobbery to say that vaginal birth is nothing!

Two words...get one!