carlimac

HALLELJUAH!!!!
This is HUGE for people whom are converts or otherwise have close family members that are not 100% active.  I am so happy.

I don't know what was wrong with it. Probably just frozen. DH fixed it. 

I did!!

The child is 18 but I've been told she may be "delayed" mentally. Hard to tell. I only had a brief conversation with her. If so I wonder if CPS should be involved, even though she is 18 in years.
Yes from what I understand the wife is "crazy", whatever that means. I asked the RS president if she was worried about the wife being extremely angry when she gets home and finds out all her stuff has been thrown away. She said, Yes but this was her husbands decision to do this so he'll have to be the one to face the consequences.
The husband has been involved since day one. He has bad habits himself but he was the one who contacted the RS president. He has been taking loads to the dump. The daughter has helped, too. Although her own bedroom needs lots of help, too. 
RS and bishop say they are going to work on getting them the help they need. I don't know what that entails. Again, I have no stewardship and may never find out since I bailed on the cleaning part. 

Well the bishop decided to carry on and try to help them. He's seen the pictures. They say they've made it a matter of fervent prayer so who am I to judge. As I said, I don't have stewardship in this at all. I had no idea who this woman was. Still haven't met her.  I just showed up to help because the RS president is my friend. The husband seems relatively "normal" and wants to help his wife but he's been living in a different part of the house that doesn't look much better.  I feel they need some kind of help beyond what the church can give them. 
I think what's going to happen is that once they get this woman's bedroom in shape for her to return home, she'll need home health nurses to check up on her. Once they are involved, it will hopefully be out of the ward's hands if further referral to the health dept is needed. 
I admire the RS president's grit. I wouldn't have had the guts to step one foot in there that first day when the husband came to her for help. I hope she doesn't get sick from this!! She's mom to a huge brood of kids and grandkids.  

One of the tragedies here is that the "hygiene" habits she's been taught are those responsible for this disaster.   She's got a tough life road ahead of her. 

I did!!

Yes and he's at the end of his 2nd year and studying for his first STEP exam.(otherwise known as boards )  He's consumed with studying the human body right now and hoping to pass so he can continue on to hospital rotations. The fact that he is even thinking about how religion and science are related right now is something of a miracle. Also he says he has already given the whole thing lots and lots of his time and pondering throughout undergrad at BYU and during his mission. He doesn't think studying it all again would change his mind. I think that's true unless he drops some of his intellectual thinking and allows the spirit to teach him. 
Yes it's heartbreaking. But at least he's not a criminal on drugs or in prison. There are worse places he could be. He's a very loving and compassionate person trying his best to do good things in the world. 

https://www.ksl.com/article/46530636/byu-students-plan-sit-in-to-protest-honor-code-after-viral-instagram-account-petition-seek-reform
I roll my eyes at the demands of these youngsters. I hope the Honor Code stands firm. Perhaps the tattlers need some talking to. But these protesters seem ignorant of the fact that if BYU were to implement a "No Kissing on Campus" rule, they would have every right because they are a private university and can make their own rules. The ones that don't like it should go elsewhere and let the ones who will happily comply take their place. 
And why was there a need for a moment of silence to honor LGBTs???

https://www.ksl.com/article/46530636/byu-students-plan-sit-in-to-protest-honor-code-after-viral-instagram-account-petition-seek-reform
I roll my eyes at the demands of these youngsters. I hope the Honor Code stands firm. Perhaps the tattlers need some talking to. But these protesters seem ignorant of the fact that if BYU were to implement a "No Kissing on Campus" rule, they would have every right because they are a private university and can make their own rules. The ones that don't like it should go elsewhere and let the ones who will happily comply take their place. 
And why was there a need for a moment of silence to honor LGBTs???

https://www.ksl.com/article/46530636/byu-students-plan-sit-in-to-protest-honor-code-after-viral-instagram-account-petition-seek-reform
I roll my eyes at the demands of these youngsters. I hope the Honor Code stands firm. Perhaps the tattlers need some talking to. But these protesters seem ignorant of the fact that if BYU were to implement a "No Kissing on Campus" rule, they would have every right because they are a private university and can make their own rules. The ones that don't like it should go elsewhere and let the ones who will happily comply take their place. 
And why was there a need for a moment of silence to honor LGBTs???

https://www.ksl.com/article/46530636/byu-students-plan-sit-in-to-protest-honor-code-after-viral-instagram-account-petition-seek-reform
I roll my eyes at the demands of these youngsters. I hope the Honor Code stands firm. Perhaps the tattlers need some talking to. But these protesters seem ignorant of the fact that if BYU were to implement a "No Kissing on Campus" rule, they would have every right because they are a private university and can make their own rules. The ones that don't like it should go elsewhere and let the ones who will happily comply take their place. 
And why was there a need for a moment of silence to honor LGBTs???

It seems to all have stemmed from the Instagram account @honorcodestories where students and some alumni are telling their horror stories about being snitched on and the Honor Code office calling them in. My response would be , "If you were following the code then there would be no need for anyone to snitch on you. If you are falsely accused then a call from the Honor Code office shouldn't be a threat." If they aren't guilty, there is nothing to worry about. If they have broken the honor code, then maybe they need to re-think their choices and actions. 
The problem I'm seeing is that they are taking offense to someone else reporting them and they don't like getting caught. They think students should be "self reporting". Like that's going to happen? 🤣
I think the environment that encourages  snitching is a little obnoxious and promotes this whole "judgemental" thing we Latter Day Saints have a probelm with. But what would you do if your roommate was in your room alone with her boyfriend or girlfriend for an extended period of time? What would you do? Keep quiet? Talk to the bishop? Report her/him to the HCO? Or maybe talk to your roommate and tell them how uncomfortable you are with it. If it persists after that, I'd report it. 

Yeah, not sure what the moment of silence for LGBTs has to do with the Honor Code Office. 

It seems to all have stemmed from the Instagram account @honorcodestories where students and some alumni are telling their horror stories about being snitched on and the Honor Code office calling them in. My response would be , "If you were following the code then there would be no need for anyone to snitch on you. If you are falsely accused then a call from the Honor Code office shouldn't be a threat." If they aren't guilty, there is nothing to worry about. If they have broken the honor code, then maybe they need to re-think their choices and actions. 
The problem I'm seeing is that they are taking offense to someone else reporting them and they don't like getting caught. They think students should be "self reporting". Like that's going to happen? 🤣
I think the environment that encourages  snitching is a little obnoxious and promotes this whole "judgemental" thing we Latter Day Saints have a probelm with. But what would you do if your roommate was in your room alone with her boyfriend or girlfriend for an extended period of time? What would you do? Keep quiet? Talk to the bishop? Report her/him to the HCO? Or maybe talk to your roommate and tell them how uncomfortable you are with it. If it persists after that, I'd report it. 

It is because we are more in agreement about the heterosexual immorality, which is why it is less controversial.
Ironically, that is the rub. Logically, there shouldn't be as much disagreement about homosexual immorality as there is about heterosexual immorality. But, pop culture has granted special status to homosexuals, and members, like yourself,  cater to that unwarranted favoritism. If you and other left-leaning members were consistent, there wouldn't be the greater degree of disagreement and controversy.
[Edit: I just noticed that others have iterated and reiterated this point earlier in the thread. But, evidently it bears repeating since it seems to be lost on some]
Thanks, -Wade  Englund-
 

I strongly encourage this as well.
However, since you, Scott,  and perhaps 3 others, including Mormongator,  seem vulnerable to false equivalencies,  let me kindly offer two critical suggestions so that you don't end up make egregious rookie analytical mistakes.
First, compare apples to apples rather than apples to an orange (deprecating pun intended). In other words, as @The Folk Prophet intimated a logical comparative  analysis should be sexual behavior to sexual behavior, and not sexual behavior to the full gamete of behaviors. And, it should be group to group rather than group to individual. In other words, tally all the positive and negative comments about the immoral behaviors (as the Church views it) of both homosexuals and heterosexuals, as made by the Right and the Left respectively pm this board.Then maybe create a subsection on Trump alone compared with one homosexual, to merely provide perspective Since the immoral behaviors of heterosexuals tends not to generate as much discussion as the immoral behavior of homosexuals (likely because of the stark difference in controversy), the analysis needs to be proportional. I would caution you, though, because these kinds of rational comparative analysis tend to work heavily against Leftist and pop-culture thinking, particularly as it relates to homosexuality. But, you may find the experience beneficial nevertheless.
Thanks, -Wade Enlgund-. 

The only answer any faithful Latter-day Saint should give!
Kicking against the pricks helps no one.
There are those who humbly submit to the will of The Father, and there are those who don't.
I very well recall what it was like when my libido was in full swing starting in my teenage years and going through my late 30s. I know very well that I was capable of getting aroused by a tree if I so chose.
I don't buy or believe for one second that most mid-libido men are incapable of being sexually aroused by pretty much anything.
*Moreover, when I was 18 I was entirely "turned off" by women over a certain weight. My wife and I, being in my late 40s, both struggle to keep weight off now. And yet I have learned to find my wife's "curves" very attractive. At 18 I would have NEVER pursued someone with "curves" like that because I was, immaturely, not "sexually attracted" to that.
I can understand how an immature teenage brain thinks "I only like blondes/brunettes with such-n-such measurements between this and this height. I'm sexually uninterested in anyone else". I thought that way. Yeah...teenagers are typically immature and self-centered -- especially when they start thinking with their private parts. Most people who've been married long enough realize that sexual attraction develops, changes, matures, grows, and is less important in the overall scheme of things.
How anyone who no longer has a flat belly, has wrinkles, scars, hair-loss, etc... but believes their spouse, who married them when they were young and trim, still finds them attractive, but then believes that one cannot possibly be happy unless married to someone who fits some perfect model of sexual attraction -- is either not thinking about it or lying for an agenda.
According to that agenda, a man whose wife puts on weight, develops cellulite and varicose veins, gets wrinkles, has stretch marks or scars from child-birth or the like or, worst-case, gets disfigured in an accident, must immediately leave her to be with someone who is more of a turn on.
I am entirely convinced that pretty much everything about the homosexual agenda is a lie. It is entirely based on the most immature, sexually perverse, teen-aged non-thinking "me, me, me", brain-power-centered-in-the-loins. And so many -- even many who are faithful to their overweight, balding, wrinkled spouses, and believe their spouses faithful to their overweight, wrinkled, stretch-marked cellulite, selves -- have somehow bought into the bullcrap.
Satan's got a great hold on the world's thinking.
*edit: You'll note by the previous paragraph that my being "turned off", I realize now, was based on immaturity and not by some status I could not help.

If God commands it, then of course I can!  God promised he won't give me more than I can bear.  So if he gave it to me, I must be strong enough to bear it.  Unless you're going to suggest that God was mistaken?
But see... I don't believe that "sexually attracted to" is solely a biological attraction.  I believe that sex is an expression of one's OVERALL attraction to the other person - that's not just his physical attributes as those are temporary - but his SPIRITUAL ATTRIBUTES.

My opinion - to be trusted is greater than to be loved.  Trust is far more important in marriage than love.  I believe we can learn to love anyone that we can trust but we cannot say that we can learn to trust anyone we can love.
 
The Traveler

Which is fine when there is evidence, as is sometimes the case, that a conservative is being hypocritical. There is no evidence of that being the case on this board. There is, in some cases, compromise because of the world we live in. But to claim that the conservatives on this board, who are also morally conservative Latter-day Saints, are okay-dokey with adultery and abusing women is pathetic.
Why is it that we conservatives allow that progressives on the board have good intentions but are simply misguided on the solutions, but the progressives paint conservatives as willfully evil? We're being called willful hypocrites who don't really care about immorality, only about political power and bashing gays.
Which proves what? That homosexuality is good?
Give me a break, Mr. Non-sequitur.
You find me a post by anyone, any time, on this forum saying that Trump's adultery was a-okay and we can talk. Until then your point has no merit whatsoever. Trump's indiscretions have nothing to do with homosexuality and the theoretical discussions we have about how individuals struggling with that desire should approach dealing with it.
If you don't want your ideas referred to as ignorant or stupid then maybe you shouldn't blanket accuse faithful Latter-day Saints of being pro-adultery. How do you expect us to respond to that? Did you expect hugs in response to your post?

I have done the math - even with just 3 the majority of the time someone is going to be irritated - and I believe it goes up exponentially from there. -- much worse than sibling reverally with children. 
 
The Traveler

This is intellectually disingenuous.  First of all - we don't "condemn those with same gender attraction".  Rather, we "condemn the sin of same gender sex."  Second of all, Trump supporters did not elect Trump because he cheated on his wife just like W Bush supporters did not support W Bush because he is a drunk and Bill Clinton supporters did not elect Bill Clinton because he is a rapist and Reagan supports did not elect Reagan because he chased skirts in Hollywood.  But yes, tons of people elected Obama because he is black.

Your post had me chuckling. 
However, joking aside,  if you think the lack of sexual attraction makes marriage a horrible idea, then logically wouldn't that mean that the loss of sexual attraction would make staying in a marriage a horrible idea as well? Isn't the high divorce rate argument the same?
Where is the social sympathy for the high-powered males who marry raving beauties only to later find them gaining weight and wrinkles, sagging in places, and experiencing the unpleasantness of menopause, etc.  If these alpha types subsequently lose sexual interest in their spouses, particularly when there are willing, younger raving beauties about, should they not follow their heart and their sexual attractions? Many of them do now anyway--not just by way of divorce, but also adultery?.
To me, this is the problem with secular-social "reasoning." There is nothing to prevent  "immorality" creep" and the eventual normalization thereof.
Besides,  isn't the "high rate of divorce" argument a product of " immorality creep"--the increased acceptance of divorce and immoral sexual activities?  Prior to the gay movement in the mid 70, not a few gay men got married, and stayed married. It was only afterwards, when gays divorcing their heterosexual spouses became vogue, that the high rate of divorce became a factor. 
Supposed compassion and understanding made matters worse for gays.
Thanks, -Wade Englund-

The new-fangled progressive gospel:
For the natural man is an enemy to God (except for sexual orientation), and has been from the fall of Adam, and will be, forever and ever, unless he yields to the enticings of the Holy Spirit (except in the case of sexual orientation), and putteth off the natural man (except for, of course, sexual orientation) and becometh a saint through the atonement of Christ the Lord, and becometh as a child, submissive, meek, humble, patient, full of love, willing to submit to all things which the Lord seeth fit to inflict upon him (unless it means marrying someone who doesn't sexually thrill you), even as a child doth submit to his father.