clwnuke

No it isn't. Heavenly Father's goal is to have ALL His children return home - including you. Once we return home and have a full understanding of our Eternal nature and the Savior's love, the suffering your children (may) experience in this life will pale in comparison to the sadness they will feel if you can not join them in the Celestial kingdom. Remember the joy over one soul that repents? You are that one soul at this time. Any price that may be paid today on earth (marriage, husband, children) will be swallowed up in joy and forgiveness in heaven. So, do what you need to do with humility and a broken heart. Tell your husband you need to tell him a story, and he will have to tell you how it ends. As a couple, you may or may not choose to share this with your children. But whatever happens, make and stick to a commitment to confess to your Bishop and repent while you patiently and meekly endure all things. It's ALWAYS worth it.

My wife and I thought that maybe the General Conference would be broadcast from Palmyra, NY however the hotel rates in the area don't appear too extravagant at this point so probably not. Our other thought was that maybe multiple worldwide General Conferences could be held? It will be interesting to see, but the more important matter is the Saint's spiritual preparation for the Conference. That's where President Nelson's main concern seems IMHO.

I should have been more specific to say that I have never been opposed to Sisters receiving callings to the Priesthood, should the Lord ever choose to make a change in that respect.

If you think about all the procedures and policies that exist in the Church that have no particular scriptural requirements, there is still a great deal of room for adjustments. Perhaps Sisters will soon be able to serve as APs, Zone Leaders, or District Leaders on missions? As for me, I trust the Lord's timetable and direction in these matters through His authorized servants, but I've always told my wife that it would be wonderful if we could one day bless our children together 👫, and I would love to see wives sitting with their husbands (or visa-versa) on the stands at church and General Conference.

As a Baptistry coordinator, Ward Mission leader, and a former Ordinance worker I'm thrilled with this announcement!

I love it! I'm grateful for Third Hour since I have an uncontrollable interest in everything. Well done to the creators. I admire talent in those areas!

I recently participated in a practice interview for an intern in our company who wants to eventually apply for a full-time position. His resume listed a vague volunteer opportunity in Sweden for two years. I quickly ascertained that he was LDS in the interview and later asked him why he did not list his mission openly. He said that others in the company has advised him not to do so because of the discrimination that might occur. IMHO I don't think people are afraid that you will "preach the gospel", I think there is flat-out bias against LDS people, especially in states like CA. I wouldn't be surprised that in the future religious people who don't share the current views on gay marriage and gender will be legally discriminated against because companies will say that our mere presence makes for a hostile work environment. In that sense, our views on morality could eventually make us unemployable. Those who refuse to fly the rainbow flag will effectively be marked. Hmmm, now where have I read scriptures about that???? Personally, I have always listed it and have never been shy about my faith, but I think that I grew up in a different era. However, I often post on Linkedin, and I recently posted about my mission in Japan and how much it taught me about business. It had a picture of me and my wife in front of the Sacramento temple with my son who was heading out on his own mission to Fiji. That post received almost fifty times as many views as my normal boring business posts. Go figure.

As I listened to the 48-minute video it reminded me of why my wife and I decided to home-school. Both of us had been public schooled, but we wanted something different for our family. We called it: "Learning is a Lifestyle" and that became our philosophy and motto. Everywhere we went, and everything we did was an opportunity to learn. The classroom never ended. It was very successful and our children have grown into hard working well-rounded adults. Academically most of them earned full-ride scholarships to college so it worked well in that area too. If I were to name this new program I would call it "Gospel Learning is a Lifestyle" and it would have fit into our home learning philosophy perfectly. When our kids were young we would often have family home evening five, six, or seven days a week. The one thing we wanted was a home-based seminary program that we could use, but because we didn't live in a remote area the Church would not allow us to use the existing home curriculum for seminary. It seems to me that the natural extension of this new home-centered, church supported Gospel program would be making the seminary program home-based as well. It would be a major change but I guess we will see. I taught Seminary and I loved it, but it is definitely a major disruption to family life in the mornings. So, bottom-line is that I am super excited for this program because it fits perfectly into my views on life and education!

I think there is a genuine fear among the WHTEVR (since I never know what the latest acceptable term is) community that one day medical science will progress to a point where legitimate treatment options will be available for same-sex attraction and sexual identity issues. This would undermine what seems to be an agenda of complete societal acceptance of their lifestyles, so they are doing all they can to build a Maginot Line now. Conversion therapy bans are part of that effort. To be fair, the medical or psychological "conversion" therapy descriptions that I have read about do appear to be mostly quackery, but that does not mean future discoveries will not change the landscape. What should never be banned is the right of people to seek professional and private counseling in regards to these issues. Any such bans would infringe upon the freedoms of speech and religion IMHO. The interesting thing to me is that once effective options become available, I think that most of those yelling the loudest now for "equality" will be the first in line for the cures, and I wouldn't blame them. And in all likelihood, we will be able to identify these issues very early in a person's life and parents will want to treat their children before any difficulties or manifestations arise. This may lead to another legislative battle at that time over the ethics of treatment, but I think that will be a battle won by the majority. And once those options become available, I think we will look back on this era where we allowed fluid opinions and preferences to be weighed as heavily as biological facts, as a very strange one.

I was in the Renton Stake as a youth in WA, and our stake had a Youth Dance Committee (YDC) comprised of a girl and boy from each ward. The stake had its own music collection and the YDC met with a High Counselor at least once a month (usually on a Saturday morning) to review new music that the youth suggested would be good to add to the collection. We listened to the music and the criteria were simple - it had to be clean, and it had to be a good fast dance song or a good slow dance song. Approved songs were added to the stake collection. This way the music played at dances stayed fresh and every song was a good dance song. Kids could request older music from the collection list and the Stake DJ (usually the High Counselor) would work it in if he could. Standard format was 2-3 fast songs, then a slow song. We always ended the night with a slow song. The YDC also had responsibility for reviewing the standards for updates (usually printed on the dance cards) and for manning the check-in table at the dances. If someone was inappropriately dressed it was the youth who told them, but we also maintained a collection of clothing that boys or girls could borrow to meet the standards. Girls wore dresses and men wore slacks, ties, and collared shirts. No tennis shoes were allowed but that was rarely an issue when people dressed up. People without a dance card could attend after a short YDC interview to review the standards if they had an escort with a card. Members and non-members could both have dance cards. Other policies that made the dances successful: 1. Adults supervised the parking lot and cars. Nobody was allowed to hang-out in their cars or in the parking lot. 2. There were adults assigned to sit next to every building entry/exit. There was only one way in and out. 3. Adults roamed the halls and checked the rooms regularly. Areas were blocked off to reduce problems and wandering. 4. Once you entered the dance, you had to stay. If you left for any "unapproved" reason, you were not allowed back in. The youth enforced the entry/exit rules. 5. If anyone was dancing inappropriately it was a member of the YDC that spoke to them. Since they tended to be Laurels and Priests, kids were usually willing to heed their warnings. 6. There were always good refreshments. 7. It was consistent. You knew what to expect every time, and you got to know the adults who sometimes danced as well. As I've grown older I've come to recognize that President Jensen's dance policies were very wise and inspired. Every stake should have a Youth Dance Committee IMHO. PS: I remember one Saturday when a group of us decided to go up to the Bellevue Stake to attend one of their dances. When we got there we realized we were the only one's dressed up, and as we walked into the cultural hall we were surprised to find a live band playing Highway to Hell from AC/DC. Nobody was dancing and nobody seemed to care. We left and never came back .

Thank you for sharing this experience. I wholeheartedly agree. When I was 14, my family was planning to move from Fremont, CA to Kent, WA in November. My dad had already been transferred and was living in a small travel trailer and flying home on the weekends or whenever he could. Then, on a Friday night in late August just before High School was to start on Monday my parents made the decision to have me return with my dad and start school in WA instead. I was told to pack and get ready to leave around 6:00AM in the morning (flying standby meant getting to SFO early). Just like that, and without any goodbyes to friends, my world turned upside down and I was gone from the place I was born and raised. Saturday was a blur of being introduced to living in the trailer in a small trailer park in a run down industrial area, and of course in the rain. My dad worked nights so I had to stay out of the trailer until he woke up and left for work. On Sunday morning I realized that I hadn't packed any Sunday clothes - and for the first and only time of my life I went alone to church in jeans, a t-shirt, and tennis shoes with holes in them. Embarrassed, unkempt, and unknown I quietly sat down in the back and tried to be as invisible as possible. But to the credit of the Kent 1st Ward, adults and youth approached me after the meeting, introduced themselves, and welcomed me openly. I'll be forever grateful for the kindness and love they showed me when inside I was an angry and emotional mess that compounded the embarrassment that I felt. What a difference from the YW President in your story. The lesson? To paraphrase Paul - though you wear Sunday clothes regularly and obediently and have not charity, you are nothing. I wear Sunday dress, even when I have to work on Sundays, but I don't care what anybody else wears - I only care that they are there. _______________________________________ PS: I'll be forever grateful that my wife never wore panty hose! Good riddance to those horrible things. But there was a day not so long ago when people put guilt trips on women for not wearing them. "A collective high-pitched hallelujah likely went up recently among Mormon women when the LDS Church changed its policy to allow female employees in the church's Salt Lake City headquarters to forsake their pantyhose and go barelegged." SL Tribune May 12, 2011

As I was working my night shift I found myself reminiscing about the great times we had playing church basketball, softball, and volleyball, as well as the bi-weekly stake dances (with Farrells ice cream afterwards ). It seems a shame that youth don't seem to get those same socializing and missionary opportunities now. I occasionally see a tri-stake dance every three months or so now in my current region, but that could never replace the regular and well organized dances I went to as a teen in the San Francisco Bay Area and in the Seattle region. Non-members were more than glad to dress up and keep the standards. In fact the church dances were more popular and better attended than the school dances - probably because of the standards and supervision. It's such a shame. I've always wondered what changed or do leaders just not know how to organize sports and dances anymore?

@Eternum, I made no attempt to twist your words. My post was made out of concern for your situation. There is quite a bit of criticism of church members and leaders in your post and those words were my own interpretation. I have no idea whether you've used drugs or alcohol. That's why I asked - it makes a big difference when evaluating what physical, spiritual, or psychological help a person needs. As for the rest of your post I'm not certain to what you were responding. Abuse is not something that any of us on this forum would ever joke about. Again, I truly hope you can find some help and peace in your life as you move forward.

@mikbone - that's an awesome picture. Redwood forest?

@Just_A_Guy - I wouldn't worry about it any further. You did something that was hard, but necessary at the time. The Church has to balance giving general instruction to the members even when they fully realize there are many prudent exceptions to their counsel. You can see that wisdom in the wording of the handbook - "discourages", "Should be considered only if...", "the persons responsible for this decision should consult with each other". Pregnancy is a taxing process on mothers, and it did little good for so many early pioneer women to pass away during childbirth, with their babies often dying with them. As a couple you made a thoughtful and wise decision to avoid similar circumstances IMHO.

@Just_A_Guy - Thank you for sharing! It's a normal part of adult life and nothing to be ashamed about. May I ask whether you knew about the church position beforehand or did you just feel inspired to discuss it with him?

1 - I remember a time in NJ with my wife and five young children when a middle-aged woman on the street frowned at us and said "Don't you know what causes that?" My wife and I smiled and laughingly said "Yes! And we think it's awesome!". That's become our standard response ever since. 2 - Given the guidance below, a Bishop would need to follow the Spirit when evaluating the individual circumstances. But even then, I imagine most Bishops wouldn't feel comfortable telling a couple who already have children that they shouldn't consider either option. Perhaps if they are newly married and want to avoid having children so they can travel the world, but even then both tubal ligation and vasectomy are usually reversible. Some may find it hard to see how these choices differ much from an IUD or birth control pills except for the costs and expertise involved in reversing them. Personally, I've never met a couple who discussed their choice with their Bishop before they had the procedures performed, and I think that might be because a majority of members have never even heard that the church handbook addresses the subject. Handbook 2 Section 21.4.15 Surgical Sterilization (Including Vasectomy) The Church strongly discourages surgical sterilization as an elective form of birth control. Surgical sterilization should be considered only if (1) medical conditions seriously jeopardize life or health or (2) birth defects or serious trauma have rendered a person mentally incompetent and not responsible for his or her actions. Such conditions must be determined by competent medical judgment and in accordance with law. Even then, the persons responsible for this decision should consult with each other and with their bishop and should receive divine confirmation of their decision through prayer.

Eternum, may I ask what official clinical diagnoses you've been given by medical professionals? Also, I notice that there is no mention of drugs or alcohol in your post. Are you free from these habits? In all my years of working in the Church, whether in downtown Camden, NJ or in SLC, UT, and in working with small poverty-stricken branches and large very wealthy wards, I have never seen the members and leaders act as badly as you describe. Problems, yes. Rampant and methodically organized bullying, no, not ever. But I have worked with people who saw it that way - and most of them could have written your story and described their lives as "going upside down and sideways" just like you. I echo Jane_Doe's comments above: A good therapist is a good thing. You need help. Create some circumstances in your life that provide some stability and begin getting some help. And stick to it without excuses because it may take years to make progress. But you can make progress. And when you do, you may see the things a little differently. It always starts with fixing ourselves, not others. May the Lord strengthen you in your difficult journey.

As with all aspects of sexuality between a married couple, the article concludes with "it is between you and the Lord". Questions can arise however when couples feel there is a conflict between earlier church leader statements and current church policy. In my lifetime I've seen a great deal of change in how the Church deals with these issues. I believe the Lord has made adjustments in the areas of sexuality over the years to better reflect the sacred and private nature of those relations. The Law of Chastity has not changed, but the church has largely removed itself from the bedroom and left those decisions where they belong - with married couples. So, what should a young couple do when faced with the current Church position that leaves all sexual decisions to the couple, but then they read past church leader statements with do's and don'ts regarding specific sexual acts and birth control? They should take their questions to God, not to ecclesiastical leaders. The current Church Handbook is clear that leaders are not to ask about, or provide counsel regarding specific sexual practices. Couples should counsel and decide together about sexual matters while wisely considering this Church statement given in a media release on May 4, 2007 when reading past church leader statements: "Not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine. A single statement made by a single leader on a single occasion often represents a personal, though well-considered, opinion, but is not meant to be officially binding for the whole Church. With divine inspiration, the First Presidency (the prophet and his two counselors) and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles (the second-highest governing body of the Church) counsel together to establish doctrine that is consistently proclaimed in official Church publications. This doctrine resides in the four “standard works” of scripture (the Holy Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price), official declarations and proclamations, and the Articles of Faith. Isolated statements are often taken out of context, leaving their original meaning distorted.”

I knew eventually this topic might come up when I saw the articles. I have worked with great people who are gay, but I have two concerns: 1. Why is this news? Is it going to be front page news every time somebody announces a sexually oriented change in their life? Some matters are left private. 2. It sorrows me that so many people associate being "true" to themselves with their physical nature and not their spiritual nature. Being true to yourself is recognizing that your body is just a shell and that the "true" you is an eternal spirit son or daughter of God. I am sympathetic to the difficult situation a person with same-sex attraction endures, but I see it as no different from the situations for many wonderful single members of the church who never marry in this life for various reasons. They have physical desires that they long to fulfill, but they can't without offending God. The "acceptance" line of reasoning being used by so many people announcing they are coming out also troubles me. If heterosexual men and women followed that same pattern of reasoning, most would have to say that they can no longer accept being in monogamous marriages because God made them with physical desires for more than one man or more than one woman, and they need to be true and accept their natures. To me this is a false doctrine that substitutes God-given physical desires for God-given commandments. Carnal desires are not commandments, and following them outside the law of chastity can only lead to unhappiness in the eternities.

I wish you well in the next phase of your life! I don't post that often, and unfortunately I'll be in Port Orchard, WA next week, but I would have enjoyed meeting the people behind the discussions, and staying for the Cougar Game on the 29th - Go Blue & White. I guess I could visit some of my kids in UT instead of going to the game but you gotta keep your priorities straight

Is it possible that Nephi was recording his history long after all these events had transpired? That was certainly the case for New Testament gospel writers. If that was the case, then he would already know about those things. In either case, it had been a record keeping practice of the Jews for hundreds of years to separate secular and ecclesiastic records so he may have just been continuing to do what he knew. Nephi was also given prophetic visions of the future 2nd Nephi 26-30 and it may be possible that 1 Nephi 9:4 is more of a comment made to tie his record together. I wouldn't be surprised if Nephi recorded his history just prior to anointing a new king (Jacob 1:9) and charging Jacob with the plates and telling him to keep the records separate (Jacob 1:1-4). Just some random thoughts.

I hope you are right! The whole dynamic of serving missions could change as things move forward.

That is the big Catch-22 in the system today. As renewable sources increase, there must still be sources to back them up. However, those sources can't operate profitably by running only once in a while so they are shutting down. Don't let all the information out there confuse you. The reality is that electrical grids are struggling right now at the operational level to manage the uncertainties created by adding all the current wind and solar sources. There is no way a grid could operate with 100% renewable power today as the technical capability does not exist. And as this speaker pointed out, it may not even be the right goal to pursue if we are to balance environmental damage with greenhouse gas climate control.

I visit https://seniormissionary.lds.org/srsite/ fairly often and look at the opportunities to serve. I guess I just can't see a whole lot of difference between getting up every morning and working at the Family History library, or the Temple, or getting up every day and working on the Tokyo mission finances. However, if I'm a single widower I'm not currently allowed to do the latter. If I ever become single again I guess I could just move to Tokyo and serve an unofficial full-time volunteer mission for a few years