slamjet

I just had a talk with my daughter because of some sisters, not brothers, but sisters were shoving the "peter priesthood" view of women in the church.  This greatly disturbs me because all my girls tell me that it's usually not the men, it's the women that perpertrate this thinking.  Quite frankly, besides being sealed in the temple and enduring to the end, men need to be ordained to the priesthood to attain the highest level of celestial glory.  Women need only to be born.  I kind-of read something into this.
 
In any case, this whole "exponential" growth in excommunications is just plain silly unless someone can come up with numbers to support that position.  Otherwise, it's two people who have an agenda, who are polarized in their thinking, and have been invited to a disiplinary hearing.  I don't know much about Kate Kelly but I have listened to John Dehlin in interviews and podcasts and he is a wolf in sheeps clothing.
 
But I've been on the excommunicated side and I say from my own and other's experience, if they are excommunicated, they are in for some of the darkest, most challenging days of their lives because they will be buffeted by the advisary in ways they will never expect.  They will have left only two roads to go: setting aside their pride, getting some humility and walk towards the light of Christ, or continue down the path they are on and drown in the darkness.  There is no middle ground. 
 
So before they or anyone begins to blame the church for making their lives difficult, or creating difficulty for them or their families, they ought to take responsibility and accept what is to come because they got into this knowing that the outcome would end up looking like it looks now. 
 
Their crying foul is unimpressive.  Their letting the world know only makes transparent their contempt and proves their agenda and disingenuousness.

I just had a talk with my daughter because of some sisters, not brothers, but sisters were shoving the "peter priesthood" view of women in the church.  This greatly disturbs me because all my girls tell me that it's usually not the men, it's the women that perpertrate this thinking.  Quite frankly, besides being sealed in the temple and enduring to the end, men need to be ordained to the priesthood to attain the highest level of celestial glory.  Women need only to be born.  I kind-of read something into this.
 
In any case, this whole "exponential" growth in excommunications is just plain silly unless someone can come up with numbers to support that position.  Otherwise, it's two people who have an agenda, who are polarized in their thinking, and have been invited to a disiplinary hearing.  I don't know much about Kate Kelly but I have listened to John Dehlin in interviews and podcasts and he is a wolf in sheeps clothing.
 
But I've been on the excommunicated side and I say from my own and other's experience, if they are excommunicated, they are in for some of the darkest, most challenging days of their lives because they will be buffeted by the advisary in ways they will never expect.  They will have left only two roads to go: setting aside their pride, getting some humility and walk towards the light of Christ, or continue down the path they are on and drown in the darkness.  There is no middle ground. 
 
So before they or anyone begins to blame the church for making their lives difficult, or creating difficulty for them or their families, they ought to take responsibility and accept what is to come because they got into this knowing that the outcome would end up looking like it looks now. 
 
Their crying foul is unimpressive.  Their letting the world know only makes transparent their contempt and proves their agenda and disingenuousness.

I just had a talk with my daughter because of some sisters, not brothers, but sisters were shoving the "peter priesthood" view of women in the church.  This greatly disturbs me because all my girls tell me that it's usually not the men, it's the women that perpertrate this thinking.  Quite frankly, besides being sealed in the temple and enduring to the end, men need to be ordained to the priesthood to attain the highest level of celestial glory.  Women need only to be born.  I kind-of read something into this.
 
In any case, this whole "exponential" growth in excommunications is just plain silly unless someone can come up with numbers to support that position.  Otherwise, it's two people who have an agenda, who are polarized in their thinking, and have been invited to a disiplinary hearing.  I don't know much about Kate Kelly but I have listened to John Dehlin in interviews and podcasts and he is a wolf in sheeps clothing.
 
But I've been on the excommunicated side and I say from my own and other's experience, if they are excommunicated, they are in for some of the darkest, most challenging days of their lives because they will be buffeted by the advisary in ways they will never expect.  They will have left only two roads to go: setting aside their pride, getting some humility and walk towards the light of Christ, or continue down the path they are on and drown in the darkness.  There is no middle ground. 
 
So before they or anyone begins to blame the church for making their lives difficult, or creating difficulty for them or their families, they ought to take responsibility and accept what is to come because they got into this knowing that the outcome would end up looking like it looks now. 
 
Their crying foul is unimpressive.  Their letting the world know only makes transparent their contempt and proves their agenda and disingenuousness.

I just had a talk with my daughter because of some sisters, not brothers, but sisters were shoving the "peter priesthood" view of women in the church.  This greatly disturbs me because all my girls tell me that it's usually not the men, it's the women that perpertrate this thinking.  Quite frankly, besides being sealed in the temple and enduring to the end, men need to be ordained to the priesthood to attain the highest level of celestial glory.  Women need only to be born.  I kind-of read something into this.
 
In any case, this whole "exponential" growth in excommunications is just plain silly unless someone can come up with numbers to support that position.  Otherwise, it's two people who have an agenda, who are polarized in their thinking, and have been invited to a disiplinary hearing.  I don't know much about Kate Kelly but I have listened to John Dehlin in interviews and podcasts and he is a wolf in sheeps clothing.
 
But I've been on the excommunicated side and I say from my own and other's experience, if they are excommunicated, they are in for some of the darkest, most challenging days of their lives because they will be buffeted by the advisary in ways they will never expect.  They will have left only two roads to go: setting aside their pride, getting some humility and walk towards the light of Christ, or continue down the path they are on and drown in the darkness.  There is no middle ground. 
 
So before they or anyone begins to blame the church for making their lives difficult, or creating difficulty for them or their families, they ought to take responsibility and accept what is to come because they got into this knowing that the outcome would end up looking like it looks now. 
 
Their crying foul is unimpressive.  Their letting the world know only makes transparent their contempt and proves their agenda and disingenuousness.

I remember as a kid learning in school of the thought of trying to make the ice caps darker in color, like, black so that they can absorb the sun and melt because the climate was so cold.  Gee, how times change.

I just had a talk with my daughter because of some sisters, not brothers, but sisters were shoving the "peter priesthood" view of women in the church.  This greatly disturbs me because all my girls tell me that it's usually not the men, it's the women that perpertrate this thinking.  Quite frankly, besides being sealed in the temple and enduring to the end, men need to be ordained to the priesthood to attain the highest level of celestial glory.  Women need only to be born.  I kind-of read something into this.
 
In any case, this whole "exponential" growth in excommunications is just plain silly unless someone can come up with numbers to support that position.  Otherwise, it's two people who have an agenda, who are polarized in their thinking, and have been invited to a disiplinary hearing.  I don't know much about Kate Kelly but I have listened to John Dehlin in interviews and podcasts and he is a wolf in sheeps clothing.
 
But I've been on the excommunicated side and I say from my own and other's experience, if they are excommunicated, they are in for some of the darkest, most challenging days of their lives because they will be buffeted by the advisary in ways they will never expect.  They will have left only two roads to go: setting aside their pride, getting some humility and walk towards the light of Christ, or continue down the path they are on and drown in the darkness.  There is no middle ground. 
 
So before they or anyone begins to blame the church for making their lives difficult, or creating difficulty for them or their families, they ought to take responsibility and accept what is to come because they got into this knowing that the outcome would end up looking like it looks now. 
 
Their crying foul is unimpressive.  Their letting the world know only makes transparent their contempt and proves their agenda and disingenuousness.

It seems you have the same approach to addiction as most everyone else who has not experienced this first or second hand and that is just saying that repentance is all that's needed.  It's much more complicated than that.  The repentance process includes self discovery so that the addiction can be overcome, thus, the 12 step program.  As a part of that, therapy and even medication may be in the mix.  Elder Hollands talk titled "Like a Broken Vessel" gives a pretty good primer about this.  One quote from that talk is:
 
"...a crater in the mind so deep that no one can responsibly suggest it would surely go away if those victims would just square their shoulders and think more positively—though I am a vigorous advocate of square shoulders and positive thinking!"
 
Pres. Ballard talked about repentance from addiction in his talk "O That Cunning Plan of the Evil One."  His answer is that to start, fervent prayer is needed.  But there is a need to go through the process whether it's with counseling with the Bishop or a therapist.
 
For myself, I would not have been able to go through the repentance process if I didn't have medication that helped me be able to think clearly.  So please don't just stay with the "prayer and the Atonement" is the answer.  It is, but for someone starting out, they need to get to that place where they can make the Atonement work for them.  And that takes a lot of work.  Sometimes even stepping away from the church until they can get their bearings straight (as it was for me when I was ex'd).
 
I believe that's where the statement of you not having empathy for the afflicted is coming from; the overly-simplified answer of repent will fix everything and that we've been taught since our primary days.  Life is more complicated than that and while you are correct that repentance is a very necessary ingredient, there are other ingredients that are needed.  The first ingredient being an acknowledgement and confession that a persons life has become insane and unmanageable, the second is being willing to let God take control and their sins and third, letting him do just that.  And that just for starters.  It's not easy to immediately turn to the Atonement when one is in the throws of addiction.

I believe it was repentance, not prayer, and I quoted it. 
 
Well, I tried to strike a civil tone but discussion is not your aim.  You're finding all kinds of ways of being hostle just for the sake of being hostle.  There's no room for discussion so I'm moving on.

My .02, because I can...
 
I'd suggest to consider it quazi-serious because by the sounds of it, they're not sure at what level of seriousness they're at.  They're most likely still deciding where to go with their relationship so don't over-react, push or prod.  Take it easy and trust that they'll figure it out.

Well, if it was all about sex then it would be easy to deal with.  But it's not about sex.
 
If it was about a person's inability to control themselves, then it would be easy, but it's not about discipline.
 
But hey, if you haven't had experience with addiction then you wouldn't know how it works.  We get group leaders in our ARP group who think it's about sex and self discipline until they get to know the participants and hear their stories and experiences.  Then their eyes open and they see that it's much, much more than the superficial sex and discipline answers.
 
So I hope that you wouldn't go to a person who has an addiction and tell them to "get more self control" because you really are doing them a huge disservice. Just say "boy, that sucks" and "good luck" and leave it at that.

To all those who dislike the video...
 
REPENT!
 
Lest ye get smitten with hellfire and damnation!
 
:P :P :P

A few weeks ago I spoke with a person about being a facilitator in the Pornography Addiction Support Group (PASG) in the ARP program and she couldn't really get why anyone is addicted to porn.  I tried to explain and she said "oh, so they're weird."  Without a thought I replied "they're not weird, they're broken."
 
A few nights ago I spoke with one person who couldn't understand why married men had pornography problems.  He figured that since they have a wife to have sex with, then that should take care of the problem.  Without a thought I replied "it's not about curbing a sexual desire, it's about control."
 
I get where many will say that they don't understand the anxiety with pornography, many view it out of curiosity.  The issue comes when it is viewed as a way to comfort and/or control an emotional reaction either from trauma or the stress of life.  So then they view it and, like any other drug, they get desynthesized to what they're seeing.  This desynthesization reaches out into objectifying the target of their sexual inclination.  When that happens, empathy is gone and they allow pornography to dictate to them how to view and interact with others as well as give them permission to act what can be deemed inappropriate and destructive.
 
So I would ask that if someone does ask for help with a pornography issue, don't dismiss it because they have come to a realization that its no longer a harmless curiocity or fantacy but it has grabbed hold of them and made them powerless to properly deal with relationships and life's stresses.

Hmmm, when I first tried to come back into the church, I wore whatever I felt like, shorts and all.  It turned off many folks (I can see them looking at me with judgement in their faces) but there were some who took me as I was.  As I got more into church, I started to wear nicer clothing.  Then I really freaked some people out when I wore a tie to church.  Then I was baptised and wore a white shirt.  I believe there may have been one or two who passed out.  What I'm getting at is who cares what they wear?  They're there and when they get more and more into the church and become more and more converted, they will wear whatever level of respectable clothing they can with the criteria of what they're comfortable in, how they were raised or what they can afford.
 
However, I will draw the line for the temple.

Since I'm in the trenches with porn addicts, I can tell you, it's an issue in the church.  I don't have numbers but I know it may be a serious problem when my Stake dedicates one of the High Councilman to specifically deal with this issue.  Besides, you have to realize porn addiction isn't about sexual gratification, it's about control, or lack of it, of something in a person's life or self.  I'm not talking about the "gee, look at this" kind of thing, I'm talking about "hon, why don't you turn that thing off, it's 3 in the morning" type of thing.

COOL!  Wait, does anyone know how to read ancient Latin?

Since I'm in the trenches with porn addicts, I can tell you, it's an issue in the church.  I don't have numbers but I know it may be a serious problem when my Stake dedicates one of the High Councilman to specifically deal with this issue.  Besides, you have to realize porn addiction isn't about sexual gratification, it's about control, or lack of it, of something in a person's life or self.  I'm not talking about the "gee, look at this" kind of thing, I'm talking about "hon, why don't you turn that thing off, it's 3 in the morning" type of thing.

Hmmm, when I first tried to come back into the church, I wore whatever I felt like, shorts and all.  It turned off many folks (I can see them looking at me with judgement in their faces) but there were some who took me as I was.  As I got more into church, I started to wear nicer clothing.  Then I really freaked some people out when I wore a tie to church.  Then I was baptised and wore a white shirt.  I believe there may have been one or two who passed out.  What I'm getting at is who cares what they wear?  They're there and when they get more and more into the church and become more and more converted, they will wear whatever level of respectable clothing they can with the criteria of what they're comfortable in, how they were raised or what they can afford.
 
However, I will draw the line for the temple.

My .02, because I can...
 
I join in the chorus DEBT FREE!  There are all kinds of cost in not only purchasing but also maintaining a home that will only push you further into debt.  So if you can deal with Grandma for a bit longer, do it.  You will be on a much better footing going into a home debt free.  Besides, you don't want to have any regrets because I bet that once she passes on, you will feel like you ran away from her.  I know I wish I still had my grandma around, severe demention and all.

Please excuse me as I double-over with laughter...
 

I bet there was a lot of giggling green

As a facilitator in the ARP program, let me give you a few suggestions:
1) Read the introduction of the ARP manual.
2) In group meetings, leave a little bit of yourself behind.
3) Know that this will be a calling that you will never want to leave (at least every group leader we had has said that)
4) Don't be afraid to ask questions and give answers.  Don't come at them as a superior but sideways.
5) You're not going to know everything but someone in the group will.  Have a discussion but keep it on the level.  Don't let anyone run amok.
 
Can't really think of anything else right now, but it's been a long day.  BTW, feel free to read my blog to see how the ARP program has affected me.  It changes lives.

As a facilitator in the ARP program, let me give you a few suggestions:
1) Read the introduction of the ARP manual.
2) In group meetings, leave a little bit of yourself behind.
3) Know that this will be a calling that you will never want to leave (at least every group leader we had has said that)
4) Don't be afraid to ask questions and give answers.  Don't come at them as a superior but sideways.
5) You're not going to know everything but someone in the group will.  Have a discussion but keep it on the level.  Don't let anyone run amok.
 
Can't really think of anything else right now, but it's been a long day.  BTW, feel free to read my blog to see how the ARP program has affected me.  It changes lives.

Oh, BLEH! Like it\'s so surprising that I\'ve been banned before.

two things come to mind:
1) It will be similar to what we have here; friends, family groups, learning, experiencing, etc.
2) We will be surprised at how many people are there because God is not a failed parent.

Oh, BLEH! Like it\'s so surprising that I\'ve been banned before.

What the freak happened?!?! And where\'s the \"laugh\" button?
Also, those warning points over there <<<<< really? That was way back in 2011, is there no forgiveness?