Backroads

My husband and I recently went through the process of a sealing clearance for him: Once all the paperwork was in the mail, the clearance was approved in two weeks. Now, when his first wife divorced him, she did request and receive a sealing cancellation without any plans for marriage (she is currently serving a mission, actually). This strikes most people as strange, but it does prove it's possible, if not common. I wouldn't look at the 1-year waiting period as necessarily a bad thing. I personally don't agree with it, but I won't but up much of a fight with it. We were considering a civil ceremony and would have done so, but I'm glad we got married in the temple. But I once read a blog on why civil ceremonies aren't such a bad thing. This forum gave me quite a few good thoughts on it. The sealing is what's important in the end. I say, enjoy the civil ceremony. Make it pretty and special and all those things. It doesn't have to be a bad thing. I have a friend whose wife was divorced, and they didn't want to bother waiting so long for her cancellation. They're temple worthy, will be soon getting sealed if my math is correct, but decided waiting so long wasn't worth it in their situation. So... they had a gorgeous garden wedding. It was lovely and I doubt anyone faulted them for it.

Last year when I read the Standard Works, I felt great. I did half an hour a day, which is quite intense, but it was my goal and I used the thought of read scriptures vs watch a half-hour sitcom. Find a good pace that works for you, and, has been said, READ EVERY DAY!!! If you skip days, it's easy to skip more and more.

Eh, I figure dinosaurs existed in much the way paleontologists have theorized. I see no reason to believe differently.

Please go back and reread my posts. I never said it's common for porn to lead to kiddie porn. YOu are also suggesting that it is okay to have affairs and lie about porn to a spouse if it's nothing to make a big deal about.

I think I might be more likely to do so BECAUSE of the cemetery! (Yes, I am weird like that).

Thanks, I'll look into that. Quickclaim deed taken care of awhile ago. It's just crazy... the woman is squabbling over a few days. Really, if worse comes to worse, we store stuff somewhere until we can get into the place in the other city (and I'm out absolutely nothing). I just refuse to pushed around when I'm going to not be in a good place to be moving things out.

Nothing is in the mother's name, but she micromanages her childrens' lives and everyone else's. She might not be able to do anything legal herself, but... if the title is back in her daughter's name, the mother could make her daughter do a lot... and possibly succeed, just by being her. (Deed is still being held by a bank, actually, as no one has paid the mortgage in full yet... It's a very confusing process...(I have no interest in spelling it all out as that's not really the problem).

I see where you are coming from. I guess the way that phrase was worded struck me as hyperbolic and generalizing, so I didn't think of taking it as an absolute. Words like "or" in the situation used tend to be hyperbolic, used merely as possible examples. And I agree with getting rid of the scare tactics. But it is common for one kind of porn to lead to something else. When I spoke of the process to the generalized things mentioned, it is a fairly documented process. By the way, belittling us without backing it up and instead just calling us crazy makes us less inclined to agree with you. Learn how to say something more intelligent and readable than "you're all crazy".

No one ever said as anything as concrete as what you just said. If you are suggesting that one form of porn NEVER leads to another sexual issue, you are the one who is mistaken and a lot psychologists would disagree with you. It may not be a hardfast rule, but it happens. Quite a bit. Curiosity begets curiosity. When one thing isn't satisfied, the mind and body can progress onto other things.

... what's crazy about that? It's a logical process, and it's pretty standard for porn addiction and results.

It really is a personal situation and me being a peacemaker is trying to keep a friendship. My mother and this second mother have been friends since childhood. My mother would take a bullet for this woman, give her a kidney, give her a lung, etc. But they sort of have had a blowup this past summer and while my other would still give her life for her friend in an instant, she has also decided it's been a somewhat abusive friendship. I'm really thinking of talking mainly through the friend and her brother. I've been faithful at whatever Friend has needed for this to work and she trusts me. As for her brother... this kid could possibly be translated at any moment, he's that awesome a person, and I know I could definitely work with him... possibly leave a few thing in the condo as needed until moving them out is more feasible? Now I'm thinking if I could get them to back me up, Mother might not be so much of a challenge. maybe this thread is mostly venting...

I guess we're trying to decide the right time frame to do everything. Like I said, it's been a nice situation for me and I would like to give the property back to my friend to transfer to her brother. And, to be honest, it'll be plenty to easy to get student housing in the college town we're moving to. I'm looking for teaching jobs in that area and if that doesn't pan out my office can transfer me to their office in that city in a snap (in fact, they're planning on it, just waiting for me to say when). I want to make the transition easy as possible for everyone, but I also know that I could be in a bad situation if I sign over the property and the Mother doesn't want us there anymore. Which makes me wary of signing it over at this time. Am I being selfish?

Friend was so desperate to move that it was all signed over to me to convince me to stay with it.

I guess I don't understand why I have to ask to do anything since all the property is in my name. If I wound up having to pay for a hotel, I'm going to feel bitter. But I do see what you're saying. And we have discussed it with her. She's pretty hell-bent on getting her way. She wants to get in there and fix up the condo for her son. She's also mad that bad luck on my part prevented me from taking over the mortgage before (never mind her daughter is in this mess twice over). I do not joke when I see myself signing over the property, then having any major furniture/appliance I have in there sold behind my back.

Sure they have. The members of the church in various countries who still bare the shoulders (those who have not been endowed and therefore have no garments to cover) have not been excommunicated.

If this just didn't sum it all up... :) Jennerator and checkerboy, I am under the impression that you are arguing that if it does not correspond with with USA Mormon culture, it's wrong and en evil "tradition of someone's fathers". You seem to be suggesting that anyone at anytime during history who dressed different was consciously and willingly sinning. Modesty is a relative term. It has changed countless times throughout history. It is NOT an eternal principal. If it were, the Church would give us a much more specific dresscode.

A couple of years ago, I moved into this little condo when a family friend moved out of it. At the time, I was all set up to officially buy it, do the mortgage thing, the whole 9 yards. But... about ten minutes before signing the papers, crazy market at the time created some problems. We figured, all right, we'll deal with another time, not realizing just what the future would be. Simply put, our next deal was that I took over the property while she still handled the mortgage. I've talked to various bankers, mortgage lenders, real estate workers, etc over the past couple of years as we've tried to put everything over to me. Basically... the friend is in a bad position if I ever don't feel like paying the mortgage and nothing falls on me. The thing is that luck is never on my side in order to take over the mortgage. It's not a bad situation (for me). I'm paying less than what others pay in rent for the same kind of place and I always pay on time. When I had to switch jobs and take something of a paycut, that made taking over the mortgage pretty much impossible... since my husband are moving at the end of the summer in order for him to finish school. Still not a horrible situation. Friend's little brother is getting married also at the end of the summer and really wants the condo (it's small, cheap, cute, etc.) Seems like we can end this thing cleanly and quietly... Except... these friends have a very intense, micromanaging mother (this woman is actually a second mother to me and I love her dearly, but she is intense, micromanaging, and not altogether honest, which means she is not very happy about the situation, especially as my friend is in this same situation with not just the condo, but with another house altogether.) My husband and I can be reasonably out of the condo in early August, reasonably before the wedding. The only hitch is that my husband will be spending most of July at a military training. Still, with early August available, we're confident we can have the move completed. The mother wants us out by August 1. Right now, all the property is in my name. I would love to sign it back over (honestly, no loss to me whatsoever), but knowing these people and now having this desired deadline, I'm a little apprehensive about signing the property back over at this time. I would really hate to alienate this family by putting up too much of a fight on this, but I also don't want to find myself on the streets. Any way to handle this without burning any bridges?

Oh, wow... I'll just add a quick opinion. Adjust/streamline the laws, cut away some of the red tape, I'm down with that. I support legal immigration and always will. My heart goes out to those that have troubles. I think Rammy is preferring an adjustment of laws rather than full-on supporting illegal immigration>

I didn't sense any justification in this, either. Just... asking. Which is fine. However, I really do like the idea of telling what you told us to the stake prez. We could sit here and argue over just how bad it is, but what it comes down to is that YOU aren't feeling all that great about it.

Oh, I disagree with the idea of paying parents to teach their children. That suggests that ALL education is a waste of time. I think we've had this discussion before. anatess, I'm looking at getting into charter schools. When I was teaching in the public school system, it was frustrating. You're expected to teach the kids (which is fine, of course) but only if you did it their way. Sigh. It's hard to meet needs.

Immodest by whose standards? Such-n-such people set up a civilization. In order to survive and thrive, the people had to work with the surrounding environment: What was available to eat? Feasible to hunt? Feasible to grow? What textiles were available with which to make clothing? What clothing was necessary to make practical hunting/farming/ceremony/life/etc? We mentioned the Middle East. The dry heat made long billowing (and as a result body-covering outfits) the most comfortable and practical. Other cultures, that wouldn't work as well. I don't think very many cultures based their common everyday outfits solely on sex appeal. I don't think many of them had modesty/immodesty at the front of the brain.

But there is something so sexy about Lucious Malfoy...

But the way I understand it, we won't be able to tolerate any glory higher than what we earned. Which makes me assume our resurrected bodies would differ somewhat...

Expecially when there is enough selection of material to suit the individual garment wearer and their climate comfort tastes...

I don't know... I think we are still now and then getting alterations to garments. From what I understand, in the early days of the garments they weren't even a full-time wearing thing as they are now (if I'm mistaken on that, please correct me!) Garments hardly allow you to be immodest, but many of the garment styles are getting shorter. Then there are the military garments which are designed to not look very much like garments at all! I do see what you are saying that the Lord's standards won't change... but I wonder if the garments really are concerned with modesty at all or if that is merely a side-effect that came from the necessity to cover them. My mom often talks about how when she was young people wore the short-shorts and tank-tops all the time without a thought for modesty as modesty in clothing wasn't really stressed at the time. All in all, I'm sure all members of all cultures are perfectly happy to alter their clothing in order to meet garment standards. I just don't know if garments and modesty are intricately connected.