classylady

Currently I have a photograph taken about 17 years ago of my family while we were at Old Sacramento.  We are all dressed in period costumes from the 1800's. It's a black and white photo.
 
True story:
 
When this thread first came up, I asked my husband if I could post my desktop the way it was suggested.  He said "no," that it wouldn't work with my Apple laptop. I'm technically challenged, so I started asking questions about the wallpaper photo I was using, and how it came to be my wallpaper. I hadn't chosen it, my grandson had put it as my wallpaper. Husband then proceeds to show me how to set up my desktop wallpaper photo. I told him, "don't erase the photo that grandson put up, because I love it" (It's of my two younger children and oldest grandchild). He said "don't worry, it's here on your computer, and it won't be lost". He then proceeds to show me where to go on my computer and how I could even copy Urstadt's photo, and have it as my wallpaper.  And voile, Urstadt's desktop photo was now my desktop photo. I tell him, "that's nice, now put back the picture of the kids. Well, long story short, we cannot find that photo anywhere on my computer. We searched through iPhoto, all my documents, and cannot find that photo anywhere. I have thousands and thousands of photographs that I have scanned and stored on my computer.
 
So, I searched through all my pictures on my computer and chose the black and white one that is currently my wallpaper. I don't know where or how my young grandson found the original photo and used it as my wallpaper.  I will have to hunt through my stacks of photographs and scan it again. It has literally disappeared from off my computer.
 
I'm not sure I can trust my husband again.

In a few weeks going to Independence and Council Bluffs and Winter Quarters

So that's where my husband's missing socks went.

Anything red with a block U on it is absolutely hideous.

So, we used Alton Brown's recipe for red beans and rice.  We substituted Andouille sausage instead of the pickled pork he calls for.
 
1 medium onion, chopped
2 green peppers, chopped
3 stalks of celery, chopped
5 cloves of garlic, minced
1 t of dried thyme
1 t of hot sauce
3 bay leaves
1/2 t of cayenne pepper
salt/pepper
Andouille sausage, cut into bite sized pieces--I used about 12-16 oz (I don't remember how big the package was)
1 lb of red kidney beans, sorted and rinsed (no need to soak)
2 quarts of water
 
 
Saute the onion, pepper, and celery until softened.  Add the garlic and cook for about a 1-2 minutes more.  Add the thyme, hot sauce, bay leaves, cayenne pepper, salt and pepper (about 1 t of each -- I just add to taste).  Then add the beans, sausage and water.  Bring to boil, then reduce to simmer for about 1.5 hours.  Stir occasionally.  Check the texture of the beans and if needed, continue to cook.  I cooked it overall for about 3 hrs.  Once you turn it off, let sit for 15 min or so and it will thicken.  Serve over cooked rice.
 
Some tips:  
 
1. I took out about a cup and 1/2 of the beans (picked out the sausage) and mashed them.  I used a potato masher.  Then I added that back in.  That will help it be thicker.  
 
2.  You can use whatever sausage you want.  I think smoked sausage would be good in this.  I used Andouille because I like the flavor and it has spice in it.  
 
3.  Be careful of the spice. If you are a wimp like me, then I wouldn't put in the cayenne until you've tasted it and determined if it has enough spice.  Andouille sausage is spicy so I was careful to add just a smidgen of cayenne.  Dravin wanted it spicier.
 
4.  It needed something smoky in it.  Next time I make it, I'm going to chop up about 6 pieces of bacon and cook that, then cook my veggies in that oil instead of the veggie oil I used.  If that doesn't give it enough smoke, then I will use a hamhock to get that smokiness in it.
 
5.  I also think it needed more thyme.  Next time, I am going to use 2 teaspoons instead of 1 to see if I can bring out that earthiness in it.
 
I didn't make enough rice, so we had some crusty bread that I dipped in mine.  YUM!  I liked it with rice and next time, I'll make more (I was using up a bag of white rice.  I'm making brown rice tonight for leftovers).  But, eating it with crusty bread was very good (the bread was a little stale, so soaking it in the beans was a tasty way to soften it).

This week, I'm making cinnamon almonds.  And this weekend, I'm making a butternut squash and beef stew.  One of my favorite meals.  YUM!

My husband received full custody of his two very young children when he divorced his ex-wife. What he learned, is that he had no say in his ex-wife's personal life. She had been excommunicated and lived a very promiscuous lifestyle. He would worry about the environment his ex was subjecting the children to. He had to learn to let it go and let his ex live her life (she was never abusive to the children). The ex remarried twice. My husband never met the new men in her life until after she was married. And, it was never a formal introduction-just a short glimpse of the new husband as the children were either dropped off or picked up for visitation. The children are now adults-in their mid 30's. They turned out fine. Both served full time missions and are still active in the church. They love their mother. They love their dad. That is how it should be. They were able to choose for themselves what kind of lifestyle they wanted to follow. They chose to be active members of the church.
 
When you think about it, what can you do after meeting the new fiancé? Nothing! As long as he is not abusive there is nothing you can do. It doesn't matter if you approve of him or not. It is your wife's decision, not yours. She may not be going about it in the way that you or I would approve, but it is her life, and she has the right to live it the way she sees fit.
 
Also, with the new fiancé's family enabling the relationship, what are they supposed to do? Not invite her to family functions? Should they exclude her? Should they say to the young man, "you may attend, but do not bring your fiancé." They, too, may not approve of the relationship (because she is not legally divorced, or they may not even be bothered by it) but it sounds like they are a loving family and are trying to support the young man. I would want my children to be around people who are loving and supportive. I always told my step-children, they are lucky/blessed to have so many bonus parents, grandparents, aunts and uncles, and half-siblings who love them.

My husband went through something similar with his ex wife. They had been married in the temple, had two small children, but his ex wife no longer wanted anything to do with the church, or the responsibility of their two children. She loved her children, but no longer wanted the full-time responsibility of caring for them. They ended up getting divorced. My husband got full custody of the children. My husband feels bad for what his children had to go through, (and still go through, even though they are adults now). But, he's so grateful he is no longer with his ex wife. She was excommunicated, and has never returned to the church. He tried to make their marriage work, but she no longer was invested in the marriage. My husband decided that divorce was the best answer. He did not want a marriage where they were no longer a team and had become more like roommates rather than husband and wife.
 
Give it some time to see if this is just a phase your husband is going through. He may come to his senses. He may not. Do a lot of praying to get the direction from the Lord that He wants for you and your family.

I don't find it hard. To me, following the WofW and paying tithing offers me blessings.

Raven,  actually there are several people here that know me fairly well. I used to be a moderator here a few years ago.  And I find that many of my online friends have become some of my best friends....

D&C 132:39 has this to say about King David:  "David's wives and concubines were given unto him of me, by the hand of Nathan, my servant, and others of the prophets who had the keys of this power; and in none of these things did he sin against me save in the case of Uriah and his wife; and, therefore he hath fallen from his exaltation, and received his portion; and he shall not inherit them out of the world, for I gave them unto another, saith the Lord."

 

From the April 1971 Ensign, Milton R. Hunter had this to say: "David, whom the Lord loved and who is regarded by many people as Israel’s greatest king, spent the latter part of his life in brokenhearted sorrow over his sin against Uriah and his adultery with Bathsheba. His deep feelings were expressed in one of the most pitiful prayers in the holy scriptures:

“Have mercy upon me, O God, according to thy loving kindness: …

“Wash me thoroughly from mine iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin.

“For I acknowledge my transgressions: and my sin is ever before me.” (Ps. 51:1–3.)

Having an understanding of the plan of salvation and a thorough knowledge of the seriousness of the gross sins of adultery and murder which he had committed, King David in anguish cried out unto the Lord: “… thou wilt not leave my soul in hell.” (Ps. 16:10.)

"More than two thousand years after King David’s death and only 127 years ago, Jesus Christ spoke from heaven and informed us that because of David’s sin against him in the case of Uriah and his wife, David “hath fallen from his exaltation” and his wives have been given to another. (D&C 132:39.)"

 

From the Old Testament Student Manual: "The price of David’s sin of murder and adultery was high. He spent the rest of his life regretting it. In one psalm he expressed his mental torment and pleaded for forgiveness.

“Have mercy upon me, O God, according to thy loving kindness: according unto the multitude of thy tender mercies blot out my transgressions. Wash me throughly from mine iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin. For I acknowledge my transgressions: and my sin is ever before me. …

“Create in me a clean heart, O God; and renew a right spirit within me. Cast me not away from thy presence; and take not thy holy spirit from me.” (Psalm 51:1–3, 10–11.)

Eventually, David received the assurance that his soul would be “delivered … from the lowest hell” (Psalm 86:12–13). But this assurance could not restore the blessings he had lost. They were gone forever (see D&C 132:39)."

 

From Ask Gramps: http://askgramps.org/11843/atonement-and-king-david: " We know from the Book of Mormon, that our Heavenly Father is not able to allow his mercy to rob justice and its demands.

King David was taught, and was a child of the Lord’s covenant people. When King David purposely sent Uriah to the front lines, he knew Uriah would die. King David also knew from his youth that murder was against the 10 commandments.

Yet, we find another example in the Book of Mormon where some Lamanites, blood thirsty and murderers of the Nephites took an oath, a covenant, with God in hopes that they would find forgiveness from their blood stained swords.

There is a difference between the Lamanites and King David. The Lamanites from their infancy were taught to hate and kill the Nephites. King David however was taught not to murder at all, unless he is defending himself as in times of war.

The atonement of Jesus Christ is not permission or allowance of any sin, but an opportunity to be forgiven. The atonement doesn’t take away the consequences of certain decisions. Thus, according to the knowledge King David had, he has found himself in a position where his sin is not covered by the atonement to allow him entrance for exaltation."

This is all taken from Old Testament Student Manual:
 
“His (David's) repentant feelings were no doubt sincere, but he could not repent enough to restore the life of his friend, Uriah, nor the virtue of his wife (Bathsheba). Though he later hoped and prayed that his soul would not be left forever in hell (the spirit prison), yet the eternal destiny of doers of such twin sins does not look good. (See Psalms 16 and 51; then see Hebrews 6:4–6;Revelation 22:14–15; D&C 132:27; 76:31–37; 29:41 and 42:18, 79.)” (Rasmussen, Introduction to the Old Testament, 1:185.)
 
(26-21) 2 Samuel 12:13. David Is Still Paying in Hell for His Sins
The Joseph Smith Translation says, “The Lord also hath not put away thy sin” (JST, 2 Samuel 12:13).
Elder Joseph Fielding Smith, commenting on David’s sin, said: “David committed a dreadful crime, and all his life afterwards sought for forgiveness. Some of the Psalms portray the anguish of his soul; yet David is still paying for his sin. He did not receive the resurrection at the time of the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Peter declared that his body was still in the tomb, and the Prophet Joseph Smith has said, ‘David sought repentance at the hand of God carefully with tears, for the murder of Uriah; but he could only get it through hell: he got a promise that his soul should not be left in hell.’ Again we ask: Who wishes to spend a term in hell with the devil before being cleansed from sin?” (Answers to Gospel Questions, 1:74.) ...
 
No success can compensate for failure in our personal lives or in our families. Consider that David was destined for exaltation, destined to rule in heaven forever and ever as a Creator and a God to his future children. As the Lord said, there is no greater gift that He could offer a man than eternal life (see D&C 6:13). David had it within his grasp, and then, in a foolish attempt to hide his sin, sent a man to his death. Had he even come to himself after his transgression with Bath-sheba and sought repentance as sincerely and earnestly as he did after Nathan’s parable, there is every indication that he could have come back and received forgiveness. It would have been difficult, but not impossible. But he did the very thing of which so many are guilty—he compounded his sin by trying to cover it up. Elder Spencer W. Kimball indicated that there is no restitution possible for murder.
“As to crimes for which no adequate restoration is possible, I have suggested … that perhaps the reason murder is an unforgivable sin is that, once having taken a life—whether that life be innocent or reprobate—the life-taker cannot restore it. He may give his own life as payment, but this does not wholly undo the injury done by his crime. He might support the widow and children; he might do many other noble things; but a life is gone and the restitution of it in full is impossible. Repentance in the ordinary sense seems futile.
“Murder is so treacherous and so far-reaching! Those who lose their possessions may be able to recover their wealth. Those defamed may still be able to prove themselves above reproach. Even the loss of chastity leaves the soul in mortality with opportunity to recover and repent and to make amends to some degree. But to take a life, whether someone else’s or one’s own, cuts off the victim’s experiences of mortality and thus his opportunity to repent, to keep God’s commandments in this earth life. It interferes with his potential of having ‘glory added upon [his head] for ever and ever.’
 
Elder Bruce R. McConkie explained the limits of David’s eternal inheritance:
“Murderers are forgiven eventually but only in the sense that all sins are forgiven except the sin against the Holy Ghost; they are not forgiven in the sense that celestial salvation is made available to them. (Matt. 12:31–32; Teachings, pp. 356–357.) After they have paid the full penalty for their crime, they shall go on to a telestial inheritance. (Rev. 22:15.)” (Mormon Doctrine, p. 520.)
From celestial to telestial—that is tragedy. Although David was brave and had great intellect, administrative ability, and faithfulness early in life, he failed in one important thing—to endure to the end.
David was a great example in his fulfillment of his calling as king, and a tragic example in his falling from glory. We can learn from both aspects of his life."

I agree with you.  It's not just the objective severity of the sin; it's the severity of the sin in conjunction with the light and knowledge that the sinner had at the time of the sin. 
 
Also, bear in mind (re Packer's quote):  Everyone who is saved in any kingdom of glory at all, receives forgiveness--were it not so, they would remain in outer darkness in eternity.  And I think we often focus on exaltation so much that we tend to underestimate just how big of a gift "forgiveness" and even a place in the Telestial Kingdom really is. 
 
That said:  not everyone can be sanctified to the point that they can endure celestial glory and entrusted with all the powers and responsibilities that exaltation entails.  David had his opportunity to show what he would do with ultimate, unfettered power over life and death; and in that regard his test--the D&C and Joseph Smith tell us--is over.  He can still be saved, in the loose sense of the word; but he will never be entrusted with such absolute control over humans ever again.

That if you have an opportunity to commit adultery and then murder to cover it up that you might want to pass on it.

D&C 132:39 has this to say about King David:  "David's wives and concubines were given unto him of me, by the hand of Nathan, my servant, and others of the prophets who had the keys of this power; and in none of these things did he sin against me save in the case of Uriah and his wife; and, therefore he hath fallen from his exaltation, and received his portion; and he shall not inherit them out of the world, for I gave them unto another, saith the Lord."

 

From the April 1971 Ensign, Milton R. Hunter had this to say: "David, whom the Lord loved and who is regarded by many people as Israel’s greatest king, spent the latter part of his life in brokenhearted sorrow over his sin against Uriah and his adultery with Bathsheba. His deep feelings were expressed in one of the most pitiful prayers in the holy scriptures:

“Have mercy upon me, O God, according to thy loving kindness: …

“Wash me thoroughly from mine iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin.

“For I acknowledge my transgressions: and my sin is ever before me.” (Ps. 51:1–3.)

Having an understanding of the plan of salvation and a thorough knowledge of the seriousness of the gross sins of adultery and murder which he had committed, King David in anguish cried out unto the Lord: “… thou wilt not leave my soul in hell.” (Ps. 16:10.)

"More than two thousand years after King David’s death and only 127 years ago, Jesus Christ spoke from heaven and informed us that because of David’s sin against him in the case of Uriah and his wife, David “hath fallen from his exaltation” and his wives have been given to another. (D&C 132:39.)"

 

From the Old Testament Student Manual: "The price of David’s sin of murder and adultery was high. He spent the rest of his life regretting it. In one psalm he expressed his mental torment and pleaded for forgiveness.

“Have mercy upon me, O God, according to thy loving kindness: according unto the multitude of thy tender mercies blot out my transgressions. Wash me throughly from mine iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin. For I acknowledge my transgressions: and my sin is ever before me. …

“Create in me a clean heart, O God; and renew a right spirit within me. Cast me not away from thy presence; and take not thy holy spirit from me.” (Psalm 51:1–3, 10–11.)

Eventually, David received the assurance that his soul would be “delivered … from the lowest hell” (Psalm 86:12–13). But this assurance could not restore the blessings he had lost. They were gone forever (see D&C 132:39)."

 

From Ask Gramps: http://askgramps.org/11843/atonement-and-king-david: " We know from the Book of Mormon, that our Heavenly Father is not able to allow his mercy to rob justice and its demands.

King David was taught, and was a child of the Lord’s covenant people. When King David purposely sent Uriah to the front lines, he knew Uriah would die. King David also knew from his youth that murder was against the 10 commandments.

Yet, we find another example in the Book of Mormon where some Lamanites, blood thirsty and murderers of the Nephites took an oath, a covenant, with God in hopes that they would find forgiveness from their blood stained swords.

There is a difference between the Lamanites and King David. The Lamanites from their infancy were taught to hate and kill the Nephites. King David however was taught not to murder at all, unless he is defending himself as in times of war.

The atonement of Jesus Christ is not permission or allowance of any sin, but an opportunity to be forgiven. The atonement doesn’t take away the consequences of certain decisions. Thus, according to the knowledge King David had, he has found himself in a position where his sin is not covered by the atonement to allow him entrance for exaltation."

Middleaged Mormon Man wrote a great blog on this subject that came out today.
 
http://middleagedmormonman.com/home/2014/09/seminary-seek-diligently-suck-buttercup.html

What Kimball said is very true; however I would be extremely cautious.  I would get to know his culture extremely well and I would be prepared to make some sacrifices.  For example, what if he wanted to move back to his home country?  Would you be okay with this.  Other cultures have very different views of male/female relationships.  Without knowing your background it is impossible to guess, but latinos for example have a very macho culture.
 
In general get to know his family extremely well, get to know how he was raised.  If there are things that make you uncomfortable now, be prepared b/c in general if it makes you a little uncomfortable prior to marriage when the love bugs are flying it will be very difficult after the infatuation wears off and the real work of marriage begins.
 
If he is of a different religion then you've got several strikes that will make marriage very hard.  Is it doable? Sure, but in general the closer your husband's culture matches yours the better.

I don't find it hard. To me, following the WofW and paying tithing offers me blessings.

D&C 132:39 has this to say about King David:  "David's wives and concubines were given unto him of me, by the hand of Nathan, my servant, and others of the prophets who had the keys of this power; and in none of these things did he sin against me save in the case of Uriah and his wife; and, therefore he hath fallen from his exaltation, and received his portion; and he shall not inherit them out of the world, for I gave them unto another, saith the Lord."

 

From the April 1971 Ensign, Milton R. Hunter had this to say: "David, whom the Lord loved and who is regarded by many people as Israel’s greatest king, spent the latter part of his life in brokenhearted sorrow over his sin against Uriah and his adultery with Bathsheba. His deep feelings were expressed in one of the most pitiful prayers in the holy scriptures:

“Have mercy upon me, O God, according to thy loving kindness: …

“Wash me thoroughly from mine iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin.

“For I acknowledge my transgressions: and my sin is ever before me.” (Ps. 51:1–3.)

Having an understanding of the plan of salvation and a thorough knowledge of the seriousness of the gross sins of adultery and murder which he had committed, King David in anguish cried out unto the Lord: “… thou wilt not leave my soul in hell.” (Ps. 16:10.)

"More than two thousand years after King David’s death and only 127 years ago, Jesus Christ spoke from heaven and informed us that because of David’s sin against him in the case of Uriah and his wife, David “hath fallen from his exaltation” and his wives have been given to another. (D&C 132:39.)"

 

From the Old Testament Student Manual: "The price of David’s sin of murder and adultery was high. He spent the rest of his life regretting it. In one psalm he expressed his mental torment and pleaded for forgiveness.

“Have mercy upon me, O God, according to thy loving kindness: according unto the multitude of thy tender mercies blot out my transgressions. Wash me throughly from mine iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin. For I acknowledge my transgressions: and my sin is ever before me. …

“Create in me a clean heart, O God; and renew a right spirit within me. Cast me not away from thy presence; and take not thy holy spirit from me.” (Psalm 51:1–3, 10–11.)

Eventually, David received the assurance that his soul would be “delivered … from the lowest hell” (Psalm 86:12–13). But this assurance could not restore the blessings he had lost. They were gone forever (see D&C 132:39)."

 

From Ask Gramps: http://askgramps.org/11843/atonement-and-king-david: " We know from the Book of Mormon, that our Heavenly Father is not able to allow his mercy to rob justice and its demands.

King David was taught, and was a child of the Lord’s covenant people. When King David purposely sent Uriah to the front lines, he knew Uriah would die. King David also knew from his youth that murder was against the 10 commandments.

Yet, we find another example in the Book of Mormon where some Lamanites, blood thirsty and murderers of the Nephites took an oath, a covenant, with God in hopes that they would find forgiveness from their blood stained swords.

There is a difference between the Lamanites and King David. The Lamanites from their infancy were taught to hate and kill the Nephites. King David however was taught not to murder at all, unless he is defending himself as in times of war.

The atonement of Jesus Christ is not permission or allowance of any sin, but an opportunity to be forgiven. The atonement doesn’t take away the consequences of certain decisions. Thus, according to the knowledge King David had, he has found himself in a position where his sin is not covered by the atonement to allow him entrance for exaltation."

I would be careful with such a simplistic response.  Caloric restriction can trigger your body to protect itself (and the person naturally) from famine.  The human body is a fantastic machine but it can fight nasty to keep itself alive.   It your body thinks its starving it will make you hungry (with all the side effects of that) and it will tank your metabolism to conserve energy, and gear up to more effectively store fat over the long term.  This puts you in direct conflict with your body.  As long as your body thinks it is in danger it will work to protect itself, you might win over the short term but it will win over long-term.   This is why most diets fail, this is why people's weight can yo-yo back a forth.  Its doesn't have to be because of a lack of will power or self control that they fail.
 
Unless instead of fight against your body you learn to work with it.  Learn to eat when your body says it needs food and stop eating when it says it is done.  Rather then eating emotionally and/or fulfill social expectations.  And when you do eat, eat the right things.  Give your body the things it needs so that it can work well, chances are it will then demand less.

My husband and I would be interested. We have very limited cash resources, so we would be especially interested in learning what we can do without a lot of money. BTW, my hubby does have a ham radio and his license.

My husband and I have always had an open-door policy for our children. If they need to live with us as adults, they are welcome to do so. I love having them. We've had two different adult children, who were newly married, live with us (and one was a step-son whom I have never considered differently from any of my biological children). It gave them the opportunity to save money for school, future housing, etc. Currently, we have our youngest son still living with us. He is 20 years old and working nearly full time. Also, my oldest grandson, 11 years old, lives with us. (His mom died when he was 2 months old), His dad, (not our child), also lives with us (but, he comes and goes). My 91 year old mother, with Alzheimer's, has also been living with us. And in the past, we have had a co-worker of my husband move in with us for awhile. I figure if we have space in our home, and food to share, it's the Christlike thing to do.  So far, I don't feel like we've been taken advantage of. I've just been grateful we have had the means to help out. I figure whatever I have is a gift from God anyway. 
 
Regrettably, our hospitality is most likely at its end. Due to some financial circumstances, my husband and I will most likely soon have to live with my husband's parents. I've shed a lot of tears over this. I feel like we're letting my grandson down. He has already been to so many different schools, and he finally found some stability with us. I feel like we're ripping the rug out from under him. As for my mother, I have other siblings she can live with. But, she has been the most comfortable with me. It is killing me to know I can no longer provide the stability that my grandson and mother have needed.

My husband and I would be interested. We have very limited cash resources, so we would be especially interested in learning what we can do without a lot of money. BTW, my hubby does have a ham radio and his license.

My husband and I would be interested. We have very limited cash resources, so we would be especially interested in learning what we can do without a lot of money. BTW, my hubby does have a ham radio and his license.

If can tell a story here about being prepared I would like to...about 23 years ago when I was called to serve as the Bishop of our Ward our Stake President was always stressing the importance of being prepared. I think most of us remember back when Hurricane Hugo hit the coast. He told us the Stake presidents along the coast were encouraged by their Area Authorities to get their Ham Radios up and going and that each stake needed to have a Emergency Response plan. If I remember this correctly he told us that there was only one Stake that had all this done and in place. They sustained the least damage in comparison to the other areas that were not prepared.
I suggest if you feel strongly about it......heed the promptings.