dahlia

I do not understand these pages-long discussions that take place on this topic every year or so on this site. It seems simple enough to me:
Every young man should prepare to serve a mission. Every one. No exceptions. That is a young man's duty.
But what if he's sinful? He should repent. But what if he's painfully immature? He should work to grow up. But what if he's physically or mentally or emotionally handicapped? He should do what he can to overcome these obstacles. It is the duty of every young LDS man to prepare himself to serve a mission.
But what if he can't go on a mission? That's a decision for his leaders. If he is unable to serve a mission despite preparing himself as best he can, then he is honorably excused. He has done his Priesthood duty and prepared himself; then he subjects himself to his leaders, and if they say no, then he doesn't go. No fuss, no muss, no sin, no problem. Oh, there might be social repercussions, because we live in a fallen world with imperfect people. But that has absolutely nothing to do with a man's standing before God or his preparation to do his Priesthood duty.
Now, if he is unwilling or unworthy to serve a mission, that's a different thing altogether. it's not my business, and it's not my problem, so I don't spend any time worrying about it. But let's not pretend that being unwilling or unworthy to do one's Priesthood duty is not a big deal. it is a big deal. Such a man needs to repent and get himself worthy, with his heart right before God.
And what if he is unable to serve a mission because of some past conduct? Then his duty is to repent and get himself worthy to serve a mission. He may never be allowed to serve a mission because of certain things he has done. But since you can't go back and undo what you did, you instead keep moving forward. Perhaps he has indeed permanently disqualified himself from full-time missionary service as a young man, but he can still repent and prepare himself as if he were going to serve a mission. Even if he marries his girlfriend and now most certainly cannot serve a mission, he can still repent, pray, study his scriptures, and prepare himself for missionary service. That's his duty.
And by the way, that duty applies to all the returned missionaries, as well. Even the fat middle-aged guys.
Every young man should prepare to serve a mission. it really is that simple.

In that sense, I wouldn't have been able to serve anyway; I was born with a heart condition, and at that point in my life I wasn't able to do any of that. 
...Too bad I got bupkis all support for the first several years, and was only later made a ward missionary as something of an afterthought once people finally started to wonder how I knew what I was talking about...

Wow. I don't take this view.You know, not everyone who wants to can serve. Not even every worthy male. This is the kind of attitude that makes people leave the Church and/or makes them unsure and have low self esteem for years. No thanks.

Zarahemala, the only person who is making your life stressful is YOU.  It is not Christ.  Our faith encourages us to count our many blessings, to ponder on the wonders God has done, to commune with Him, to take days of rest, to feel love and joy-- and to cherish all of these wonderful things.  You do NOT need to worry about if you're good enough.  You do NOT need to obsess over this the way you do.  It's unhealthy and against the ways of the Lord.
I'm going to reiterate my concerns that you may have OCD and should talk to your counselor about this.  

My friend, temple symbolism is just that: Symbolic. If I write the letters G - o - d, I have a symbolic word: God. That word is not itself God, it just represents him. It's a convenient handle we attach to the idea of God so that we can more easily consider him.
Temples are full of symbols. The symbols represent real, solid underlying truth, but they themselves are just symbols. You mention the "handshakes". We don't speak of those outside the temples, because they are sacred tokens. But again, they are tokens. Just like paper money has no intrinsic value, but tokenizes or represents economic value, so those temple tokens represent or tokenize gifts to be given to us, now or later. We are given simple, understandable things to help us learn about far more important things that may not be so easily grasped (no pun intended).
Welcome. I hope you continue your study of "Mormonism", and if you decide to unite with us, we will be very happy for you. I would suggest that you do not base your ideas of Mormonism on any Youtube videos or other sources hostile to the Latter-day Saints. Those who hate a thing (including the Church) are not likely to give you an unbiased, reasonable viewpoint of that thing.

Hallelujah!  Far too many people bear their storymony, thankimony, travelmony, preachimony, gratimony, love-imony, or even joke-imony when they ought to be bearing a testimony.  What you just described is a testimony.  Thank you.
99% of the time, I answer those questions with simple yes / no type statements.  Sometimes I'll ask a question about my interpretation of the question / answer, because I've had a new thought in that regard, but otherwise, it's yes / no - which I think is entirely appropriate for a temple recommend interview.

We had a young man in the ward who joined the military and went to the Middle East. He was one of the nicest guys and active in church, but just did not see himself in a mission.
When he came back on leave and gave a talk, he spoke about being a witness to the faith, how he avoided certain activities, talked to people about the Church, the good reports he received because of his behavior and charity to his fellow soldiers, etc.
He may not have been dressed in a suit and carrying the Book of Mormon, but believe me,  he was a missionary nonetheless. 
btw - Our ward listed him in the bulletin and on the bulletin board with the 'regular' missionaries from the ward. No one thinks any less of him that I know of.

I went to Michigan in the 1970's, and then again in the late 1990's. We had a range of people speak, some of whom, especially the political types, were not 'dignified or scholarly,' but they were at the forefront of the Native American movement, student rights, women's movement, etc. People at the forefront of societal change may not be educated. They may not be dignified. Shoot, they may not even be men, but they have something to say. And, I would suggest that their very popularity is a reason to hear them out, at least once, to see what they are about. 
I didn't know Milo had a podcast, so when I found out, I listened to a couple of them. My biggest complaint is that he sounded like a lot of young people. I got his message in a couple of minutes and didn't really need to listen to much more. It's not the world I live in anymore. And yes, I admit to being a terrible ageist in that regard.
On the other hand, I also recently learned that Nigel Farage of the UK's Brexit movement has a radio show that is played on YouTube. Now that is man worth listening to. 

You're mixing apples and oranges. None of these are political figures - Milo is or at least aims to be. I don't care what 'celebrities' say about anything. Except Billy Corgan, who is doing a 30 day tour thru much of the Heartland and posting on FB. I care desperately about what he has to say about music, American rock and blues music history, and doing laundry in a laundromat. : )

We had a young man in the ward who joined the military and went to the Middle East. He was one of the nicest guys and active in church, but just did not see himself in a mission.
When he came back on leave and gave a talk, he spoke about being a witness to the faith, how he avoided certain activities, talked to people about the Church, the good reports he received because of his behavior and charity to his fellow soldiers, etc.
He may not have been dressed in a suit and carrying the Book of Mormon, but believe me,  he was a missionary nonetheless. 
btw - Our ward listed him in the bulletin and on the bulletin board with the 'regular' missionaries from the ward. No one thinks any less of him that I know of.

We had a young man in the ward who joined the military and went to the Middle East. He was one of the nicest guys and active in church, but just did not see himself in a mission.
When he came back on leave and gave a talk, he spoke about being a witness to the faith, how he avoided certain activities, talked to people about the Church, the good reports he received because of his behavior and charity to his fellow soldiers, etc.
He may not have been dressed in a suit and carrying the Book of Mormon, but believe me,  he was a missionary nonetheless. 
btw - Our ward listed him in the bulletin and on the bulletin board with the 'regular' missionaries from the ward. No one thinks any less of him that I know of.

Just an observation: President Monson's wording is "should prepare," as in accepting this obligatory priesthood duty. Every accountable young man can do that. Then when things get in the way, his preparation can still be applied in other ways if it is decided by the proper priesthood authority that he cannot serve a full-time mission. Whether or not he qualifies to carry out this obligation is up to the priesthood authority calling him to serve in a particular mission, since we do not call nor release ourselves (that's an example of the president's power to bind and seal). But all young men are called to prepare, and to serve by preparing.
As far as missionaries getting independent spiritual promptings that differ from their presiding priesthood authority, I think correct understanding of doctrine will help both the president and the missionary counsel and reason together and obtain the Lord's will.

I went to Michigan in the 1970's, and then again in the late 1990's. We had a range of people speak, some of whom, especially the political types, were not 'dignified or scholarly,' but they were at the forefront of the Native American movement, student rights, women's movement, etc. People at the forefront of societal change may not be educated. They may not be dignified. Shoot, they may not even be men, but they have something to say. And, I would suggest that their very popularity is a reason to hear them out, at least once, to see what they are about. 
I didn't know Milo had a podcast, so when I found out, I listened to a couple of them. My biggest complaint is that he sounded like a lot of young people. I got his message in a couple of minutes and didn't really need to listen to much more. It's not the world I live in anymore. And yes, I admit to being a terrible ageist in that regard.
On the other hand, I also recently learned that Nigel Farage of the UK's Brexit movement has a radio show that is played on YouTube. Now that is man worth listening to. 

Best wishes, Traveler.
Get an accommodating IOL. You'll have 20-year-old eyes again -- not merely 20/20 eyesight, but the ability to focus. Or at least that's the promise.

I have known a number of transgender people since the 1970's, though I have not known them well. I've also watched a few shows about transgender issues, especially when a child is born intersex and the parents end up choosing a sex for the child.
I go two ways on this. If the person is an adult, has felt something was 'wrong' for years, and is finally making an informed choice about this issue, then it's his/her issue to deal with. I wish them well, cause what' they've chosen ain't gonna be no picnic.
However, I can't get behind teens or kids, especially little kids, who think they are transgender. The mind is not fully formed, even at 19. These children need psychotherapy (and often parents who aren't into some weird version of Munchhausen by Proxy and getting a kick out of having a transgender kid in the spotlight). Some may indeed be transgender, but I think many are not. Waiting until the mind has matured makes sense.
There appears to be a difference between people who suddenly think they are transgender and the many gay people I've known (and known well), who knew practically from childhood that they were gay. 
The fact is, there is a high rate of suicide with trandgenders, both before and after surgery. I think we are called upon to have love and be compassionate toward them, no matter what we may think personally.
 

I have known a number of transgender people since the 1970's, though I have not known them well. I've also watched a few shows about transgender issues, especially when a child is born intersex and the parents end up choosing a sex for the child.
I go two ways on this. If the person is an adult, has felt something was 'wrong' for years, and is finally making an informed choice about this issue, then it's his/her issue to deal with. I wish them well, cause what' they've chosen ain't gonna be no picnic.
However, I can't get behind teens or kids, especially little kids, who think they are transgender. The mind is not fully formed, even at 19. These children need psychotherapy (and often parents who aren't into some weird version of Munchhausen by Proxy and getting a kick out of having a transgender kid in the spotlight). Some may indeed be transgender, but I think many are not. Waiting until the mind has matured makes sense.
There appears to be a difference between people who suddenly think they are transgender and the many gay people I've known (and known well), who knew practically from childhood that they were gay. 
The fact is, there is a high rate of suicide with trandgenders, both before and after surgery. I think we are called upon to have love and be compassionate toward them, no matter what we may think personally.
 

Sorry to get back so late. Here are some choices; they may be repetitive.
http://www.mormonmatters.org/2010/04/11/mormon-vegetarianism/
http://ldsmag.com/discovering-the-word-of-wisdom-pioneers-the-most-vegetarian-general-conference/
http://www.ldsveg.org/ChrisFosterPhd.htm

Greeting fellow forum members.  I have been absent for a few days.  A couple of weeks ago I noticed a distortion in my vision (left eye).  The result was surgery to save my left eye (macula and retina damage).  As I recover I can only see with my right eye but things should improve over the next few weeks as a gas bubble dissipates.  The worst part is no skiing – this is the best snow of the year.  Also no traveling – the wife will have to make a couple of trips on her own.  The eye drops are also difficult for me.  Up until this – I had near perfect eyesight - requiring reading glasses as I got older.  I had 20 25 vision (which is excellent for someone my age).  We will see how things go from here.   (Pun intended)
The interesting thing about the recovery is that I must keep my head down and avoid looking up.  Gives a whole new perspective on life – those with head that hang down.  I even have to drink from a straw.  The good part is that the wife has to put all the dishes away.  Thanks
 
The Traveler

I keep an open mind about such things.  We know that, via genetic mutation, all sorts of anomalies may appear in the human body that don't necessarily mirror the body in its perfected form.  Some of these, I believe, are gender-related--people with female genetalia who turn out to have a "y" chromosome and lack ovaries/uteruses, for example.  It isn't a matter of God "making mistakes"; it's just a consequence of living in a world that is fallen temporally, chemically, molecularly as well as spiritually.  I am not prepared to say that occasionally, the fetus of an embryo that was meant for a female spirit can't wind up developing biologically as a male--or vice-versa.  We know that gender is an eternal characteristic of the spirit.  But presumably, the ability to see is also an eternal characteristic of the spirit--and that certainly doesn't mean that mortality doesn't sometimes temporarily obscure this "eternal" characteristic.
I look to to the church for guidance about how such individuals should pattern their lives.  A couple of years ago in an interview with the Salt Lake Tribune Elder Oaks acknowledged that with regard to transgender issues "we have some more teaching to do".  This suggests to me that's God may not yet have said all He has to say on the subject, and in the meantime it sounds to me like your friend is going about things in the right way by living chastely and not attempting to shame or manipulate the church into doing things his way.

Oh boy - it wasn't that long ago that I was in your shoes. I was just planning on learning some Mormon history from the missionaries and it kind of went out of control from there. : )
Seriously, I agree with another poster that you should try both; reading is one thing, participating in a service and meeting people is another. For me, I felt really blessed that I didn't have to be baptized to take the Sacrament. From the beginning, I felt that I needed the Sacrament to help me during the week as I thought about everything. I would also suggest that you read some of the Conference talks to get a feeling of how the leadership speaks to the Church and what feels is important to know.
I think converting is the best thing I've ever done (short of becoming a parent). I'm very glad I did it - and that I found this board, which was very supportive of me as I sought answers.

Trump wasn't my first choice, but I have enjoyed watching the show. As an east coaster, a lawyer, a corporate stooge before going into academe, I know Trump types. He doesn't bother me because I know that's how those people act. It's like Chris Christie. I liked him fine because I don't have a problem with his brashness, etc. On the other hand, I know people who get their knickers in a twist because they think these guys aren't 'nice people.'  So what? You don't have to be a nice person to get the job done. That said, I've certainly learned more about Trump's niceness and generosity than I have about Hillary's (non-existent). 
I found the term 'Mormon Social Justice Warrior' to be interesting. My son has been asking me about a church to join that would support his family. Obviously, I would like him to be Mormon, but he thinks that the Church is too 'feminine,' too willing to roll over in the name of being nice (or diversity, or immigrants, or women, you name it). I wouldn't have used the term 'Mormon social justice warrior,' but yeah, it fits. We have to deal with SJW garbage almost daily being academics and he doesn't want to have anything to do with people who think that way. He's looking at the Orthodox Church because it is has stayed true to its conservative beliefs (and he is Greek on his grandfather's side, with an ethnically Greek name, so it's not as odd as it may seem.). 
Most people here can probably separate their religion from their politics. I have a difficult time doing so (hence my being attracted to the LDS because of its history in America and its generally conservative nature). Personally, I was shocked when many of my RS sisters said they would vote for Hillary, who was in favor of 3rd term abortion and other matters that are so anti-LDS. I don't know how they could do that. Politics and religion are interlocked, but maybe that's just me. I'm going to do some thinking about Mormon SJWs and what that means.

Trump wasn't my first choice, but I have enjoyed watching the show. As an east coaster, a lawyer, a corporate stooge before going into academe, I know Trump types. He doesn't bother me because I know that's how those people act. It's like Chris Christie. I liked him fine because I don't have a problem with his brashness, etc. On the other hand, I know people who get their knickers in a twist because they think these guys aren't 'nice people.'  So what? You don't have to be a nice person to get the job done. That said, I've certainly learned more about Trump's niceness and generosity than I have about Hillary's (non-existent). 
I found the term 'Mormon Social Justice Warrior' to be interesting. My son has been asking me about a church to join that would support his family. Obviously, I would like him to be Mormon, but he thinks that the Church is too 'feminine,' too willing to roll over in the name of being nice (or diversity, or immigrants, or women, you name it). I wouldn't have used the term 'Mormon social justice warrior,' but yeah, it fits. We have to deal with SJW garbage almost daily being academics and he doesn't want to have anything to do with people who think that way. He's looking at the Orthodox Church because it is has stayed true to its conservative beliefs (and he is Greek on his grandfather's side, with an ethnically Greek name, so it's not as odd as it may seem.). 
Most people here can probably separate their religion from their politics. I have a difficult time doing so (hence my being attracted to the LDS because of its history in America and its generally conservative nature). Personally, I was shocked when many of my RS sisters said they would vote for Hillary, who was in favor of 3rd term abortion and other matters that are so anti-LDS. I don't know how they could do that. Politics and religion are interlocked, but maybe that's just me. I'm going to do some thinking about Mormon SJWs and what that means.

Trump wasn't my first choice, but I have enjoyed watching the show. As an east coaster, a lawyer, a corporate stooge before going into academe, I know Trump types. He doesn't bother me because I know that's how those people act. It's like Chris Christie. I liked him fine because I don't have a problem with his brashness, etc. On the other hand, I know people who get their knickers in a twist because they think these guys aren't 'nice people.'  So what? You don't have to be a nice person to get the job done. That said, I've certainly learned more about Trump's niceness and generosity than I have about Hillary's (non-existent). 
I found the term 'Mormon Social Justice Warrior' to be interesting. My son has been asking me about a church to join that would support his family. Obviously, I would like him to be Mormon, but he thinks that the Church is too 'feminine,' too willing to roll over in the name of being nice (or diversity, or immigrants, or women, you name it). I wouldn't have used the term 'Mormon social justice warrior,' but yeah, it fits. We have to deal with SJW garbage almost daily being academics and he doesn't want to have anything to do with people who think that way. He's looking at the Orthodox Church because it is has stayed true to its conservative beliefs (and he is Greek on his grandfather's side, with an ethnically Greek name, so it's not as odd as it may seem.). 
Most people here can probably separate their religion from their politics. I have a difficult time doing so (hence my being attracted to the LDS because of its history in America and its generally conservative nature). Personally, I was shocked when many of my RS sisters said they would vote for Hillary, who was in favor of 3rd term abortion and other matters that are so anti-LDS. I don't know how they could do that. Politics and religion are interlocked, but maybe that's just me. I'm going to do some thinking about Mormon SJWs and what that means.

The whole idea of a "hate crime" is contrary to traditional American values.. We punish actions, not thought -- or at least, that's supposed to be the case. Besides, the very idea is stupid. "Hate crime" as opposed to -- what? Love crimes? People commit crimes because they are criminals, not because they are overflowing with an excess of charity and benevolence. Of course their crime is inspired by hate, or desperation, or something else. There is always a reason people do things. Remember the image of Lady Liberty blindfolded? There's a reason she's not supposed to peek.
Punish bad acts, not bad thoughts. I don't really give a hoot whether the black adults who beat up the white guy did it because they hate whites, or they hate Trump, or they simply like beating people up. Only in exceptional circumstances are the reasons for criminal activity at all relevant. Like, maybe if they thought he was on fire and they were trying to save him.
To restate: The whole idea of a "hate crime" is contrary to traditional American values.

Trump wasn't my first choice, but I have enjoyed watching the show. As an east coaster, a lawyer, a corporate stooge before going into academe, I know Trump types. He doesn't bother me because I know that's how those people act. It's like Chris Christie. I liked him fine because I don't have a problem with his brashness, etc. On the other hand, I know people who get their knickers in a twist because they think these guys aren't 'nice people.'  So what? You don't have to be a nice person to get the job done. That said, I've certainly learned more about Trump's niceness and generosity than I have about Hillary's (non-existent). 
I found the term 'Mormon Social Justice Warrior' to be interesting. My son has been asking me about a church to join that would support his family. Obviously, I would like him to be Mormon, but he thinks that the Church is too 'feminine,' too willing to roll over in the name of being nice (or diversity, or immigrants, or women, you name it). I wouldn't have used the term 'Mormon social justice warrior,' but yeah, it fits. We have to deal with SJW garbage almost daily being academics and he doesn't want to have anything to do with people who think that way. He's looking at the Orthodox Church because it is has stayed true to its conservative beliefs (and he is Greek on his grandfather's side, with an ethnically Greek name, so it's not as odd as it may seem.). 
Most people here can probably separate their religion from their politics. I have a difficult time doing so (hence my being attracted to the LDS because of its history in America and its generally conservative nature). Personally, I was shocked when many of my RS sisters said they would vote for Hillary, who was in favor of 3rd term abortion and other matters that are so anti-LDS. I don't know how they could do that. Politics and religion are interlocked, but maybe that's just me. I'm going to do some thinking about Mormon SJWs and what that means.