Backroads

I like the thread preview function, so you can go to the first post... or the last post.
 
As for changing usernames... I was kinda getting tired of "skippy" and the 740 was in reference to an address I was at that didn't have a lot of fond memories.
 
So I changed it to my moniker that I use on other forums, and now I can't change it again.  Oh well.  I snuck it in!  :)

I held my daughter when she was blessed. She was nine months old at the time, and wouldn\'t have sat still otherwise. Placing hands under the baby is likely only because a baby\'s head tends to be too small to accommodate many hands, and the baby needs holding anyway (in my daughter\'s case, my husband, our bishop, and the two grandfathers were the only ones in the circle, and they took care to mostly use fingertips instead of whole hands on her head). But the ordinance of \"naming and blessing\" isn\'t exclusive to infants. A five-year-old who is named and blessed in Sacrament meeting isn\'t held by the Priesthood brethren in the circle. Most women who bring up the baby blessing example aren\'t looking to participate in the Priesthood circle, but rather to simply have the privilege and ability to hold the infant that they carried and gave birth to, as it receives the first Priesthood ordinance of its life. It\'s not an unreasonable request.

They can be compared because the LDS church is a religious organization, just like the Catholic Church and the multiple Protestant churches are. All have their own rituals that are important and sacred to each religion. You may feel that LDS rituals are far superior than non-LDS rituals, but you take up space on the same Earth and therefore the beliefs and rituals of other religions are just as important to them as yours are to you.
M.

Not sure this makes a difference but here's a woman's perspective...
 
 
The LOC is not broken if you choose to be intimate with your spouse, regardless of if the marriage is crappy, in a state of separation, or pending divorce - you're still married - but that doesn't mean continuing intimate relations is a good idea... If there is a wedge in the marriage that has driven it to the latter two aforementioned, I would be very careful about making the decision to sleep with my estranged husband, and for several reasons. One, assuming the whole downfall of the marriage is due to broken trust, I would question whether he has remained chaste (from other women) during our separation/pending divorce. I would be concerned of contracting an STD (or worse) if he's sleeping with other women. I can't control what he does but I can control what I do with my body and I would opt to protect it. Second, emotionally and psychologically, I'm not sure how beneficial it would be to remain intimate with someone I no longer trusted. Sure, it might fulfil a physical need but that's where better judgement comes into play. Third, if there are children in the picture, I would be careful what message I'm sending to them. Marital affairs can be confusing to those outside of it, and children might have a good idea of what's going on, but in the end they're left with a lot of questions. I think having the mind set of "friends with benefits" with a spouse you are separated from or pending divorce isn't the thought process the Lord would want us to have. So for me it's either (i) work through your marriage and enjoy the benefits that come with it, or (ii) get out of your marriage and live without the benefits that came with it.

ABSOLUTELY appropriate to be intimate during a "separation", if it is a part of a healthy, loving interaction I would suggest as often as both of you enjoy it too. HOWEVER, I am concerned and I would suggest there are some bigger issues going on here that you might want to explore and soul search other than the sexual part. As a therapist, when I hear "separate but involved", a week maybe a month which is too long, but a year? The intimacy, although very important, might be insignificant compared to you needed to understand what you want (as appose to what he wants) and pursuing it.

If you are legally married then you aren't technically breaking the law of chastity -- letter of the law wise. Spirit of the law...??? Well, that's more difficult. It's an interesting question. Part of the reason sexual relations are reserved for marriage is because marriage is a commitment, and that commitment ties into the ultimate point of sexual relations, which is child bearing. But, of course, that is not the only reason sexual relations are reserved for marriage. So it's not entirely cut and dry.

It's been fairly clearly taught that abstaining from liquor includes even tastes. I also think it would set a pretty bad example for a member of the church who is temporarily in the public's eye to be consuming liquor in any degree. No one expects a devout Jew to partake of pork. No one should expect a devout Mormon to partake of liquor. If a cooking show requires the use of liquor, a Mormon simply shouldn't be a part of it. A devout Jew would be likewise unwise to join a cooking show called Cooking with Bacon. :)

Cool I can do a boonie hat avatar!!

I understand what you're saying, estradling, but I still think it's good that the Church is acknowledging the please of many women in the Church, daughters of God, who do feel marginalized for whatever reasons.  The Church is showing that they do sympathize, or at least that they hear these women.  I don't see a change anytime soon on the ordination issue (if ever), but I think that these recent steps the Church has taken will help to assuage many.  And I think that's important.
 
Even if it is announced this morning that women may now receive the Priesthood, the dialogue would likely then shift to a countdown or campaign to have a woman prophet/president of the Church, which would likely take another half-century or more.  I know that the requests/desires/demands will change over time.  But I don't think that means that the Church can't or shouldn't change trivial things (like seating arrangements) in the meantime, even if only to say "we see you, we hear you, we love you."

Apparently the OW also wants to help with moving.