clwnuke

@JohnsonJones have you considered that many of us who made our decisions to not receive mRNA spike protein vaccines under emergency use authorizations made those decisions long before President Nelson spoke on the subject?
And have you also considered that many of us regularly exercise and maintain good health habits, have worn our masks, have continued to take, or started to take vitamin D, have avoided large groups and visits with family, have used disinfectant religiously (no pun intended), etc.,
And don't these things count toward "Do[ing] all [we] can to bring COVID numbers down in your area so that your temple opportunities can increase."? While I respect your viewpoint, I do not understand your seemingly singular focus on interpreting President Nelson's recommendation for vaccination as a mandate that divides the faithful from the goats.
I respectfully ask some questions to ponder -
1. Do we need to get the same exact vaccine as President Nelson in order to be exactly obedient? Surely to be fully obedient we would need to take no other COVID vaccine other than the one he took right? Or is there room for interpretation on which vaccine to receive and when to receive it? 
2. Since President Nelson did not specify which COVID vaccine to receive, is it OK if those people who have already contracted COVID and enjoy a natural vaccinated state with active antibodies to not receive an additional vaccine? Or is there room for interpretation in this example as well?  
3. Are people that have significant co-morbidities such as obesity, but who get a COVID shot, more obedient that the healthy person who chooses not to get a COVID shot at this time? Or is there room for interpretation in this example too?  
I love President Nelson, and I am so grateful for all he has done in his lifetime to serve Jesus Christ and His Church. I'm grateful he has spoken on this issue, even if I have chosen to patiently wait. I respect his medical career and knowledge and I feel from a public relations standpoint that he has absolutely done the right thing. But I also have no doubt that if we sat down and discussed the matter together he would completely and lovingly respect my choice.
Will I be able to serve another foreign mission without the COVID shot? Not presently. But it's OK if I serve state-side. Is it possible that Church policy may change and I will no longer be able to serve in the Temple without having the COVID vaccine? Yes, it's possible. And if that happens I will serve in other places. And is it possible that this may all go away just like the original SARS virus did and we go back to normal and COVID vaccines are no longer required? Of course, so I'm not sure why we need to panic, criticize, or goad others into our viewpoints.
In 2000 my younger brother died from leukemia. I watched him suffer through long, intense, and grueling pain for many months prior to his graduation from this life. He made a personal choice to receive those treatments despite a very small chance of success. I would have chosen differently, and yet both decisions would have been right. Imagine that?

@JohnsonJones have you considered that many of us who made our decisions to not receive mRNA spike protein vaccines under emergency use authorizations made those decisions long before President Nelson spoke on the subject?
And have you also considered that many of us regularly exercise and maintain good health habits, have worn our masks, have continued to take, or started to take vitamin D, have avoided large groups and visits with family, have used disinfectant religiously (no pun intended), etc.,
And don't these things count toward "Do[ing] all [we] can to bring COVID numbers down in your area so that your temple opportunities can increase."? While I respect your viewpoint, I do not understand your seemingly singular focus on interpreting President Nelson's recommendation for vaccination as a mandate that divides the faithful from the goats.
I respectfully ask some questions to ponder -
1. Do we need to get the same exact vaccine as President Nelson in order to be exactly obedient? Surely to be fully obedient we would need to take no other COVID vaccine other than the one he took right? Or is there room for interpretation on which vaccine to receive and when to receive it? 
2. Since President Nelson did not specify which COVID vaccine to receive, is it OK if those people who have already contracted COVID and enjoy a natural vaccinated state with active antibodies to not receive an additional vaccine? Or is there room for interpretation in this example as well?  
3. Are people that have significant co-morbidities such as obesity, but who get a COVID shot, more obedient that the healthy person who chooses not to get a COVID shot at this time? Or is there room for interpretation in this example too?  
I love President Nelson, and I am so grateful for all he has done in his lifetime to serve Jesus Christ and His Church. I'm grateful he has spoken on this issue, even if I have chosen to patiently wait. I respect his medical career and knowledge and I feel from a public relations standpoint that he has absolutely done the right thing. But I also have no doubt that if we sat down and discussed the matter together he would completely and lovingly respect my choice.
Will I be able to serve another foreign mission without the COVID shot? Not presently. But it's OK if I serve state-side. Is it possible that Church policy may change and I will no longer be able to serve in the Temple without having the COVID vaccine? Yes, it's possible. And if that happens I will serve in other places. And is it possible that this may all go away just like the original SARS virus did and we go back to normal and COVID vaccines are no longer required? Of course, so I'm not sure why we need to panic, criticize, or goad others into our viewpoints.
In 2000 my younger brother died from leukemia. I watched him suffer through long, intense, and grueling pain for many months prior to his graduation from this life. He made a personal choice to receive those treatments despite a very small chance of success. I would have chosen differently, and yet both decisions would have been right. Imagine that?

And likewise, those who feel vindicated in their own opinions simply because the Prophet seemed to say something that agreed with them have no justification to get on a high horse and judge others who disagree.
To simply follow the Prophet without prayerful consideration is almost as bad as refusing to follow without prayerful consideration.  And I do know many who disobey simply because they disagree, not because they HAVE prayed and not yet received confirmation.
In the end, it is about sincerity of seeking the will of the Lord.  Too often, people jump on the "well it was only good advice, not a commandment of the Lord" train when they took no thought to even pray about it at all, let alone, sincerely.
But sincerity is not something we can really judge without knowing a person really well.

Just so you know:  I'm approaching this from a completely different perspective. Consider the two examples which follow.
Every time I've heard something from the prophet or apostles that sound off in the slightest (and I do mean slightest) I listen, ponder, and pray about it.  Most of the time I've gotten a confirmation that it was true and wise counsel.  So, I did it even if I disagreed -- whether that disagreement was major or minor.  But a few times, I've never received that confirmation.  So, I would continue to ponder and pray.  But until I received such confirmation, I did according to my own best judgment at the time.
One time I remember that I was absolutely justified in believing that the counsel I heard was completely wrong and would be of NO EFFECT.  I really thought that was one of the most knee jerk, ignorant, and stupid things I'd heard in a long time.  But I prayed about it.  And you know what?  I received a confirmation.  It was NOT that it was "good and wise counsel."  It was that I would be blessed by obeying that counsel even if it only seemed like looking at Moses' serpent to be healed. After all, what does a looking at a serpent have to do with being healed?
So, I did what was counseled.  And I was right.  It had NOTHING to do with what it was supposed to be related to.  But at the same time, my confirmation was correct.  I was indeed blessed in unrelated ways because of my willingness to obey.
In the end, I don't do what he prophet says simply because he says it.  I do it or not because I sincerely ponder and pray.  And depending on the answer I will go and do. Anything else would be "ignoring the prophet" or "blindly following" a flawed human being.
On the matter of masks, I have not received any such confirmation.  So, until I do, I have to trust in my own mortal judgment.  This does not mean that his counsel was faulty.  I'll give you another example of what I mean.
My wife said that the Spirit told her that we ought to make a change in our lives.  I did not like the idea of this particular change.  It was a rather onerous change that I simply did not believe in.  But she was adamant that her impression was true.  And I really believe in my wife's spiritual promtings -- perhaps more than I should.  But this big of a change meant that I would need a confirmation of this same thing she had.
YEARS went on. She made changes as much as she could on her own.  I kinda sorta went along with it because I love my wife.  I kept praying about it.  Never received a confirmation.
Finally she came to me to specifically talk about this.  She wondered why I hadn't prayed about it.  She was surprised to hear that I had.  I told her that while I believe in her, such a big change would require a confirmation myself, or else I just can't make such a sacrifice by going all the way.  If we truly are to be equally yoked, then I need the confirmation just as she did.  And I just hadn't.
She started to wonder if she had been mistaken in her impression.  As I heard this, I really knelt down to pray and had a discussion with the Lord.
I prayed wondering why this was happening.  I really had a lot of confidence in my wife's spiritual sensitivity.  I read a lot about this topic and I see lots of things that make sense on both sides.  But putting it all together when there is so much that is unverifiable was not something I could do as a mortal.  So, if it is that important why wouldn't I receive a confirmation as my wife had?
That was when the answer came.  We were both looking at the issue as if it were all-in or all-out.  But it wasn't that kind of an issue.  Both sides of the issue were flawed.  So, with either choice, we'd have to figure it out as we went along.  Not only that.  But this particular issue was person specific.  And I pointed out some things that she already knew about it.
We finally agreed that it would be a compromise for both of us because it wasn't an all or nothing issue.

I'm not an anti-vaxxer, in fact I had a great conversation with my doctor as I was receiving the second of my shingles vaccines a few weeks ago. He asked if I wanted to sign up for the Johnson & Johnson vaccine (before the short ban)? I replied no thank you. He continued on trying over and over to convince me that it was safe. I kept politely saying no thank you. Finally, I told him that I have monetarily invested in specific vaccine development efforts in my life and in each case it took nearly a decade to even get to the point of possible approval and financial return. I said that I preferred to wait some additional time and had no fear of contracting COVID as I am not in any high risk group. He was polite, but you could see in his eyes that he thought I was a kook.
On a different vein, the new COVID vaccine requirement for foreign missionaries appears to have caused quite a stir in the mormonworld last week. The Church even had to turn off their Facebook comments. One important piece of information that is not widely known is that a traditional "inactivated virus" vaccine called COVAXIN that does not use mRNA spike proteins will likely be available in the US in the next few months. It will also be under EUA, but it may be a preferable alternative for those who wish to go on a foreign Church mission and don't want to receive the current mRNA vaccines. 
https://indianexpress.com/article/india/bharat-biotech-covaxin-production-sale-up-700-million-doses-7281776/

I respect your sentiment, but I also think that we should not underestimate the importance of medical self-direction. One of the blessings of the new Saints books is the candid recording of some of the disagreements within the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve. The members of the Twelve have never been expected to stop thinking for themselves just because the President has an opinion on a matter. In fact, in many cases the Presidency chose not to act on matters for many months because of division among the Apostles, often waiting long periods for just one person to change their mind. 
I believe the Lord is just as patient with us when we don't agree on a recommendation from the President of the Church. It was not given as a commandment, and just as the Word of Wisdom did not carry that status for many years, this also does not and don't pretend that it does. Some may choose to act now, others may choose not to act at all, and some may be like my brother-in-law. He had full COVID three months ago, and chose to get the vaccine anyway. The first shot had only minor complications, but the second put him in the hospital with life-threatening complications. Justifiably, he does not intend to receive any further booster shots. Is he now a reprobate and apostate for his stance? Let's be careful to limit our judgement to our circle of responsibility and respect that others have that same agency.

I respect your sentiment, but I also think that we should not underestimate the importance of medical self-direction. One of the blessings of the new Saints books is the candid recording of some of the disagreements within the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve. The members of the Twelve have never been expected to stop thinking for themselves just because the President has an opinion on a matter. In fact, in many cases the Presidency chose not to act on matters for many months because of division among the Apostles, often waiting long periods for just one person to change their mind. 
I believe the Lord is just as patient with us when we don't agree on a recommendation from the President of the Church. It was not given as a commandment, and just as the Word of Wisdom did not carry that status for many years, this also does not and don't pretend that it does. Some may choose to act now, others may choose not to act at all, and some may be like my brother-in-law. He had full COVID three months ago, and chose to get the vaccine anyway. The first shot had only minor complications, but the second put him in the hospital with life-threatening complications. Justifiably, he does not intend to receive any further booster shots. Is he now a reprobate and apostate for his stance? Let's be careful to limit our judgement to our circle of responsibility and respect that others have that same agency.

I respect your sentiment, but I also think that we should not underestimate the importance of medical self-direction. One of the blessings of the new Saints books is the candid recording of some of the disagreements within the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve. The members of the Twelve have never been expected to stop thinking for themselves just because the President has an opinion on a matter. In fact, in many cases the Presidency chose not to act on matters for many months because of division among the Apostles, often waiting long periods for just one person to change their mind. 
I believe the Lord is just as patient with us when we don't agree on a recommendation from the President of the Church. It was not given as a commandment, and just as the Word of Wisdom did not carry that status for many years, this also does not and don't pretend that it does. Some may choose to act now, others may choose not to act at all, and some may be like my brother-in-law. He had full COVID three months ago, and chose to get the vaccine anyway. The first shot had only minor complications, but the second put him in the hospital with life-threatening complications. Justifiably, he does not intend to receive any further booster shots. Is he now a reprobate and apostate for his stance? Let's be careful to limit our judgement to our circle of responsibility and respect that others have that same agency.

I'm not an anti-vaxxer, in fact I had a great conversation with my doctor as I was receiving the second of my shingles vaccines a few weeks ago. He asked if I wanted to sign up for the Johnson & Johnson vaccine (before the short ban)? I replied no thank you. He continued on trying over and over to convince me that it was safe. I kept politely saying no thank you. Finally, I told him that I have monetarily invested in specific vaccine development efforts in my life and in each case it took nearly a decade to even get to the point of possible approval and financial return. I said that I preferred to wait some additional time and had no fear of contracting COVID as I am not in any high risk group. He was polite, but you could see in his eyes that he thought I was a kook.
On a different vein, the new COVID vaccine requirement for foreign missionaries appears to have caused quite a stir in the mormonworld last week. The Church even had to turn off their Facebook comments. One important piece of information that is not widely known is that a traditional "inactivated virus" vaccine called COVAXIN that does not use mRNA spike proteins will likely be available in the US in the next few months. It will also be under EUA, but it may be a preferable alternative for those who wish to go on a foreign Church mission and don't want to receive the current mRNA vaccines. 
https://indianexpress.com/article/india/bharat-biotech-covaxin-production-sale-up-700-million-doses-7281776/

I'm not an anti-vaxxer, in fact I had a great conversation with my doctor as I was receiving the second of my shingles vaccines a few weeks ago. He asked if I wanted to sign up for the Johnson & Johnson vaccine (before the short ban)? I replied no thank you. He continued on trying over and over to convince me that it was safe. I kept politely saying no thank you. Finally, I told him that I have monetarily invested in specific vaccine development efforts in my life and in each case it took nearly a decade to even get to the point of possible approval and financial return. I said that I preferred to wait some additional time and had no fear of contracting COVID as I am not in any high risk group. He was polite, but you could see in his eyes that he thought I was a kook.
On a different vein, the new COVID vaccine requirement for foreign missionaries appears to have caused quite a stir in the mormonworld last week. The Church even had to turn off their Facebook comments. One important piece of information that is not widely known is that a traditional "inactivated virus" vaccine called COVAXIN that does not use mRNA spike proteins will likely be available in the US in the next few months. It will also be under EUA, but it may be a preferable alternative for those who wish to go on a foreign Church mission and don't want to receive the current mRNA vaccines. 
https://indianexpress.com/article/india/bharat-biotech-covaxin-production-sale-up-700-million-doses-7281776/

I'm not an anti-vaxxer, in fact I had a great conversation with my doctor as I was receiving the second of my shingles vaccines a few weeks ago. He asked if I wanted to sign up for the Johnson & Johnson vaccine (before the short ban)? I replied no thank you. He continued on trying over and over to convince me that it was safe. I kept politely saying no thank you. Finally, I told him that I have monetarily invested in specific vaccine development efforts in my life and in each case it took nearly a decade to even get to the point of possible approval and financial return. I said that I preferred to wait some additional time and had no fear of contracting COVID as I am not in any high risk group. He was polite, but you could see in his eyes that he thought I was a kook.
On a different vein, the new COVID vaccine requirement for foreign missionaries appears to have caused quite a stir in the mormonworld last week. The Church even had to turn off their Facebook comments. One important piece of information that is not widely known is that a traditional "inactivated virus" vaccine called COVAXIN that does not use mRNA spike proteins will likely be available in the US in the next few months. It will also be under EUA, but it may be a preferable alternative for those who wish to go on a foreign Church mission and don't want to receive the current mRNA vaccines. 
https://indianexpress.com/article/india/bharat-biotech-covaxin-production-sale-up-700-million-doses-7281776/

Vort, thank you for a most interesting thread, and for sharing your insights. Like most LDS people my experiences with fasting have varied over time. It seemed hard as a child, but I always felt a strong Spirit on Fast Sunday and enjoyed hearing people bear their testimonies and collecting Fast Offerings. As a teenager it didn't feel like it was that hard to fast, but sometimes I would get some wicked headaches. After I graduated high school there was a church musical called "It's A Miracle" that was performing at the Seattle Center and I invited a non-member friend to attend. I really wanted this person to feel the Spirit so I decided to fast for 2 days, no food or water. It was August and hot, so I found myself very thirsty but the hunger pains did seem to go away overnight. I felt very positive about the experience and my friend did eventually enter the waters of baptism several months later before I left on my mission.
On my mission we were instructed not to go without water in the summertime due to the sweltering heat. That helped my occasional headaches a bit, and I realized that one can still have a spiritual reverence and attitude of fasting while maintaining health.
After my mission and into marriage I never saw fasting as difficult, except for the headaches from time-to-time. But my whole frame of mind on food and fasting changed when a friend of mine told me he was on a Keto diet. I told him it was stupid, then realized I really didn't know anything about it and so I experimented with it myself. The first time it was very hard to get into ketosis. I felt like I was dying even though I was eating non-carb foods. It was then that I had a "revelation" about my health. I was addicted to carbs. I didn't need to lose much weight, but what I found was that while I was in ketosis my mind was super clear - no fog in the morning or night. I needed less sleep and the headaches vanished.
Once I came to know how my body would react to having no carbs, I found some profound truth to all my Boy Scout survival training. You don't need food if you are lost. You need water and shelter. Your body will eventually start burning your fats and you will survive quite a long time. That knowledge changed me. I can now fast (I always drink water) for two to three days without much effort and it feels great. The longest I have intentionally taken no food has been 7 days, but I could have gone on much longer by taking a daily vitamin and drinking water.
In a way, knowing how my body reacts and knowing that I can do it without much effort, allows me to focus on my purposes more intently. I don't feel like I'm suffering when I fast, instead I feel like I'm focusing on something I know is more important. I applaud your efforts to explore this unique spiritual practice, and thank you again for sharing!

I remember lining up on my first day in the MTC and receiving 3 or 4 vaccine shots in a row. My shoulder was sore for a week so I don't think that's a new policy. While I regularly receive the flu vaccine, I have no problem with anyone (including myself) opting out of the current COVID-19 gene therapies that create spike proteins. As an investor I have watched companies work for years on true vaccines that took 7-10 years to develop. I would never take an adjuvant developed in an emergency setting right out of the gate. Perhaps too many people have forgotten the Dengvaxia tragedy in the Philippines. Experts had declared Dengvaxia safe, but the experts were wrong. The very fact that new side effects (i.e. blood clotting) have been discovered that were not anticipated from the computer modeling is an indication of the wisdom of taking time in these matters IMHO.
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/moderna-pfizer-vaccines-blood-clots-inflammation-brain-heart/

Vort, thank you for a most interesting thread, and for sharing your insights. Like most LDS people my experiences with fasting have varied over time. It seemed hard as a child, but I always felt a strong Spirit on Fast Sunday and enjoyed hearing people bear their testimonies and collecting Fast Offerings. As a teenager it didn't feel like it was that hard to fast, but sometimes I would get some wicked headaches. After I graduated high school there was a church musical called "It's A Miracle" that was performing at the Seattle Center and I invited a non-member friend to attend. I really wanted this person to feel the Spirit so I decided to fast for 2 days, no food or water. It was August and hot, so I found myself very thirsty but the hunger pains did seem to go away overnight. I felt very positive about the experience and my friend did eventually enter the waters of baptism several months later before I left on my mission.
On my mission we were instructed not to go without water in the summertime due to the sweltering heat. That helped my occasional headaches a bit, and I realized that one can still have a spiritual reverence and attitude of fasting while maintaining health.
After my mission and into marriage I never saw fasting as difficult, except for the headaches from time-to-time. But my whole frame of mind on food and fasting changed when a friend of mine told me he was on a Keto diet. I told him it was stupid, then realized I really didn't know anything about it and so I experimented with it myself. The first time it was very hard to get into ketosis. I felt like I was dying even though I was eating non-carb foods. It was then that I had a "revelation" about my health. I was addicted to carbs. I didn't need to lose much weight, but what I found was that while I was in ketosis my mind was super clear - no fog in the morning or night. I needed less sleep and the headaches vanished.
Once I came to know how my body would react to having no carbs, I found some profound truth to all my Boy Scout survival training. You don't need food if you are lost. You need water and shelter. Your body will eventually start burning your fats and you will survive quite a long time. That knowledge changed me. I can now fast (I always drink water) for two to three days without much effort and it feels great. The longest I have intentionally taken no food has been 7 days, but I could have gone on much longer by taking a daily vitamin and drinking water.
In a way, knowing how my body reacts and knowing that I can do it without much effort, allows me to focus on my purposes more intently. I don't feel like I'm suffering when I fast, instead I feel like I'm focusing on something I know is more important. I applaud your efforts to explore this unique spiritual practice, and thank you again for sharing!

I'm not understanding what the issue is. How is the analogy stigmatizing and divisive?

There is actually an Ebook from him regarding this:
https://deseretbook.com/p/stay-life-boat-dont-let-world-pull-you-under-brad-wilcox-389?variant_id=112585-ebook

@dddd 
It's always interesting to me how sometimes we can differ from the majority in our opinions, and I do in this case.
As a former High Councilor that had responsibility for working with the YSA and Single Adult programs in a stake, I think it was always an important responsibility for everyone involved to help maintain the Church designated age and divorce policy restrictions. Of course you can't force her to stop attending, but neither can the Bishop without calling police officers to remove her. 
Rather than expecting the Bishop to take care of all the "dirty work" which really isn't dirty work at all, I'm glad you attempted to help the Bishop out by lovingly suggesting to her that the ward is actually intended for those 18-30. If more help is needed, you can ask the High Councilor over the YSA ward, or other Senior couples who may be called to help the YSA ward, or by referring the matter to the Relief Society President or Elder's Quorum President.
Handbook 2 is pretty clear: "Membership in a young single adult ward is temporary. Leaders help young single adults prepare to return to a conventional ward when they marry or reach age 31." The age and divorce restrictions are wise church policies based on many years of experience. YSA wards change constantly and the Bishop does not have the time to evaluate and police all these matters himself. The members need to help self-police the policies similar to how the youth help maintain the church standards at church dances. It is always more effective for youth to caution other youth rather than leaders or adults.
At a minimum, I suggest you gently and lovingly decline to offer her future rides and be straightforward and honest why - because she shouldn't be attending the YSA ward. She may find another ride and attend, and you can still greet her warmly when she does. But I think she will respect you for doing what you know to be right.
People say you avoid a ton of drama when you don't tell people the truth, but in my experience that's not correct. You simply create more drama and shift it to someone else who has to deal with it all eventually. I think that's why I loved living on the East Coast (New Jersey), people were straight up with no hidden agendas. Blunt and honest was a refreshing change from my West Coast upbringing.
As for membership records, the Church does not typically move YSA records into the YSA ward in local stakes so that may not even be an issue. They do when you go off to college or something similar and then attend a YSA ward. 
In any case, as one who had the opportunity to ask many people to attend their proper YSA, SA, and home wards (or not to attend at all until after their divorces were final) I respect that I'm in the minority on this one and wish you luck!

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.

Two thoughts after reading all the posts:
1. Are people too hard on themselves? In my experience they usually are. But perhaps that is one reason why every knee will bow and confess that Jesus is the Christ? After seeing ourselves as "the vilest of sinners" it will amaze us when He bestows infinite amounts of undeserved mercy and grace upon us. His love will be deep enough to drive all of us to our knees in humble gratefulness.
2. In my interactions with senior Church leaders I have often seen them solicit candid and open thoughts about many topics addressed in the Handbook. When the First Presidency and the Apostles meet to discuss matters they are candid and often have different views on policies and procedures. They carefully and cordially work toward a consensus and then move forward in a united manner. I think we can support their decisions while still pondering all these things in our hearts. Curiosity is a God-given trait that helps us understand many principles over time. 
Speaking of gratefulness - a big Thank You! to Thirdhour.org and everyone who makes this Forum possible. Your work is wonderful 👍

Two thoughts after reading all the posts:
1. Are people too hard on themselves? In my experience they usually are. But perhaps that is one reason why every knee will bow and confess that Jesus is the Christ? After seeing ourselves as "the vilest of sinners" it will amaze us when He bestows infinite amounts of undeserved mercy and grace upon us. His love will be deep enough to drive all of us to our knees in humble gratefulness.
2. In my interactions with senior Church leaders I have often seen them solicit candid and open thoughts about many topics addressed in the Handbook. When the First Presidency and the Apostles meet to discuss matters they are candid and often have different views on policies and procedures. They carefully and cordially work toward a consensus and then move forward in a united manner. I think we can support their decisions while still pondering all these things in our hearts. Curiosity is a God-given trait that helps us understand many principles over time. 
Speaking of gratefulness - a big Thank You! to Thirdhour.org and everyone who makes this Forum possible. Your work is wonderful 👍

I ran into a person on another forum who flat-out said he would allow someone to take him to court for not hiring or firing a Mormon. He saw it as standing for what was right and he felt that society should not in good consciousness allow Mormons.
A relative yesterday at dinner mentioned a manager up at some office at Utah State University told them they were not allowed to hire white LDS males. Said relative smartly said sure, as long as the instruction was give in writing.
Sure, the law really does protect against this sort of thing, as it should, and I know of a few cases where the law won out.
But that does not change the fact there are quite a few people who will attempt to push anyway.

A question to think about, where is Zion these days?
I would not say it is Salt Lake City.  It has many members, but it also has a great deal who are VERY opposed to the church.  I'd say the most stringently opposed and strongest contingent of those who directly oppose the Church (as opposed to simply might teach against joining it or otherwise) are in what some would call the Mormon Belt of the United States.  I do not think that most people outside of that area even really care if one is a Mormon or not if they are not highly religious. 
On the otherhand, if they ARE in that area, it could become an issue fare more than elsewhere.  In that light, where is the Zion which they will flee to, or is it figurative.  If it is figurative than how will this operate in creating safety?
A reimplementation of the Law of Consecration and the United Order where all those who are Members own nothing but contribute in their assigned jobs (and work and jobs were in many instances assigned) and receive as according to their needs, each in the area of their ward or stake as needed...or something else?

Public Christmas decorations are a pale shadow of what they used to be, because everyone is terrified of "offending" people who are not Christians. (Not that most actual Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddists and Sikhs ever are offended by them - they know that although they do live here, this is still a Christian country. It's a bunch of virtue-signalling tub-thumpers who want to make a name for themselves by demanding "inclusivity" and the kind of "tolerance" that never tolerates anything but itself.)
(Yes I know that's nothing to do with employers refusing to employ Christians. I was just doing a bit of tangentially-relevant tub-thumping of my own.)
But having said that, what about your man Ken Ham and his replica "Noah's Ark" in Kentucky? He refuses to employ anyone but Christians. (And when Ken Ham uses the word "Christian" he's not referring to you or me!)

Well, it appears that no one understands it well enough to explain it.
I understand the marriage covenant. That's pretty straight forward. I believe being born in the covenant entitles the children to the same blessings that the parents have through the parents, so I assume that being sealed does the same thing in that regard. A temple marriage should be unbroken and dependable. I believe it is the ideal model of what a family should have... a father and mother who works together for the salvation of their children as well as their own. But the sealing is also genealogical, connecting the family of Adam to the family of God, parents to children down through all the generations of time. This latter sealing cannot be broken even by divorce. It is the same as blood relations. The natural parents of a child will always be the parents of that child regardless of whether or not they stay married. Divorce makes this extremely complicated and thus it is not ideal. For example, I have two stepchildren. I am not biologically related to either even though they refer to me as one of their parents. Having them sealed to me would effectively make me their parent spiritually which, I'm guessing, is as effective as a biological connection.
My confusion and concern was about what happens when that spiritual connection is broken between husband and wife. From my statement, it appears that it would be the same as a biological connection between natural parents and children after divorce. They are both still the parents of the children even though the parents are not together. That being said, the children could obtain a new set of spiritual parents, if, for example, the wife married another man in the temple and had the children sealed to them. That would be discomforting.
This, of course, complicates matters even more. I think it best to follow Pres Oaks' recommendation that we lean not unto our own understanding. For now, I'm happy with inaction pending further light and knowledge.

I'm just so surprised that you have even let your daughter know that boys exist. Shouldn't that wait until they are like 24 or something???