yjacket

Well I have and no that is not one of the first lessons I taught my children. The first lessons you teach in homeschooling is obedience and discipline; without those two anything else you teach is worthless.

I get it, some people need an official Church declaration on everything or "no the Church doesn't proclaim that". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mormon_views_on_evolution#Statements_of_Presidents_of_the_Church Stomp your feet in the ground and say "the Church doesn't proclaim your gospel". Okay, I've read enough of the Prophets and Apostles to understand where they stand on the issue, so if it's good enough for them it's good enough for me-I don't need to have an official Church statement. I know it's fashionable in today's society with stuff like homosexuality, priesthood for women, etc. to say "well the Church doesn't specifically say xyz" and until they do declare it official we can't really know. And then when the Church does declare it "oh how dare them, the Church is uneducated bigoted, etc., they don't really know what they are talking about". Is it possible that evolution is a fact-hey anything is possible-it's possible we are really in a Matrix dream world; but until the Prophets and Apostles change what they've said-it is pretty clear that while there is no official declaration and one doesn't have to not believe in evolution, it is pretty obvious where the leaders of the church have stood on it.

If you really had done 20+ years of homeschooling you would know that one can easily find secular books to do homeschooling with. http://www.amazon.com/Glencoe-Integrated-iScience-Student-INTEGRATED/dp/0078600472/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1451613278&sr=8-1&keywords=7th+grade+science+textbook+mcgraw+hill You said "This is, without a doubt, by far the worst thing about homeschooling curricula. Evolution specifically is attacked and shunned, and in general the religious-oriented textbooks are almost unreadable in their attempt to squeeze religious sensibility into every possible nook and cranny. A lot of such texts are simply garbage and should be shunned without mercy." Instead of saying; "some of the homeschooling curricula isn't good" you said "the worst thing about the homeschooling curricula." And yes I will ask for a CFR on your absolutely stupid example-show me a link. And I completely agree some homeschooling isn't good, some parents stink at it, some books are bad, some people give it a bad name-but the beauty and the joy of it is that you really can make it what you want it to be.

Hmm, weird . . .I will definitely be on the lookout for it; as for now it is working pretty well-but who knows. What book were they studying from?

No, I don't purposefully misconstrue your meaning, you just simply don't know what you are talking about. As for organic evolution: http://emp.byui.edu/marrottr/originofman.htm Do a search of organic evolution. Figure it out yourself-organic evolution and the Fall of Man are incompatible. The only way evolution could somehow work is for every other creation except Man to have been created through evolution. Having said that I do believe it is good for children to learn about evolution as long as it is taught as a scientific theory-which ultimately has absolutely 0 effect on their life.

Obviously you don't understand that it is plural-you knock it as saying that the worst thing about all homeschooling curricula is that they don't teach science-which is 100% wrong-you can find whatever you want with homeschooling-that is the point of homeschooling. Well you have multiple comments that can be easily interpreted as anti-religious teaching in school. For example, comments about "homeschooling" not teaching evolution and teaching creationism or giving some absolutely stupid example about interjecting religion into math; the example of which is ludicrous and I have never seen nor heard of. Now maybe somebody somewhere has taught like that-but not in any of the homeschooling books we've got. Oh and did I mention by the way that you can choose which books you want to teach you kinds? Your math example is stupid and in no way representative of anything I have ever seen in homeschooling. You quite simply do not know what you are talking about when it comes to homeschooling. Until you get educated on actual homeschooling, please don't bother to put input into what you "think" homeschooling is like.

Bingo; with the absolute mess that public schools are in today-they are more like a jail than a place to be educated. Billy brings a knife to school and he is expelled-yet when my dad was growing up kids were expected to have bb guns, knives, etc. all in their vehicles. Teachers who can't discipline the kids-kids who don't know how to shut up, sit down and pay attention, kids who bring their family values to school and then teach my kids their family values. Considering how atheist the world is becoming and lack of self-control, humility, etc. my kids end up bringing home that stuff with them. No thank you. Yes, they need to learn in the real world and they need to learn how to function and overcome today's problems. But if I can indoctrinate them until they have a good solid base, then they might stand a much better chance out there. The Amish do a pretty good job of keeping tight knit families and communities.

?? For starters there is no such thing as one homeschooling curricula. The beauty of homeschooling is that you can choose. And for people of religious faith, do we really believe in the Gospel and the Prophets or is it something that is nice one Sunday but for school it's not so nice. While the Church currently has no "official" stance on evolution-it's pretty easy to find out where they have stood in the past and where they would stand today if they needed to make a statement. https://www.lds.org/ensign/2002/02/the-origin-of-man?lang=eng As far as squeezing religiousness out of every place . . .that's what was done in this country for the first 100+ years and you know I think it worked out okay for the people who were raised that way. People can complain all they want about the current society-but it all starts at home from 0-13. If you want a kid to be religious then you teach them to be religious, you want a kid to be in the world then teach them to be in the world. Personally, since God has given me so much and as I think about religion all the time in my work or at home- yeah I will indoctrinate my kids to continually give thanks to God and to see God's hand in all things.

Technology is getting better all the time. They have an interactive class with a virtual chalkboard. The teacher will call on students and the students have to answer through the mike; the students also virtually raise their hand for questions. It works pretty well . . .it's not exactly like being in a classroom-but it's not bad. In the future, online schools and colleges will be the wave of the future. MIT has http://ocw.mit.edu/index.htm Standford has http://online.stanford.edu/courses Georgia Tech has https://pe.gatech.edu/online-masters-degrees You even have a new breed of courses: Massive Open Online Courses: http://www.omscs.gatech.edu/ Plus with things like Khan Academy online is getting pretty good. Is it exactly like being in a classroom? No, but what you give up in being in a classroom you gain in efficiency. Let's face it-public school is basically a learning day care center for kids. You can teach the same material in half the time if you didn't have to babysit the kids. So while you lose the classroom "feel", you gain in extra time.

Just curious how long ago and what grades? I haven't had any of the issues you have stated. For elementary school, the teachers are well prepared, they have 2 hours of class and pretty much two hours of homework-if the kids pays attention. If he doesn't pay attention in class it takes him a lot longer. 4 hours a day for elementary age is pretty much what I would expect. I really enjoy that they use scriptures in teaching. They write scripture sentences using the KVJ for handwriting practice. For now, and for elementary school it is really pretty good. If it is in high school, I would probably have an issue with the science; not because I believe in evolution-I don't and think macro-evolution is a bunch of hooyey but the kids need to be exposed to it. I don't think I'd have too much issue with the JS stuff . . .it's not any worse than I've gotten in high school or college. I have a college prof. once say something about Bingham Young being the founder with the Books of the Mormons or something like that. The only issue I've had is just technology issues from time to time but that is a minor annoyance. Ideally, I'd like traditional homeschooling for the one in FPE-but for right now he needs a little more structure.

Your five options are public school; private school, homeschool, online public school, and online private school. Private school may not be an option depending on where you are at; a lot of private schools are religious school and some of them (depending on what part of the country you live in) are not terribly accommodating to the LDS faith. Some people think homeschooling takes a lot of work-and it does take work but with the internet a lot of the guesswork can be eliminated. We have done everything except public school. Some states have online public school and it is a good transition if you aren't sure you really want to do homeschooling. The biggest downsides is b/c it is public they will teach common core and my goodness do they do tests. In kindergarten they have a test in every subject at least once a week---way too much! Right now my favorite is online private school like http://www.fpeusa.org/. They aren't too expensive ~1800 per year for a young kid. For elementary kids, they have class 2 hours a day and are expected to do 2 hours of homework a day. If the kids are really young, the parents are expected to monitor the class. But once they get a little older, they should be doing it all by themselves, set up class, take the class, do the homework, turn it in-etc. My son in 3rd grade is taking Latin and they teach cursive. The really cool thing is they put online what books they use in the grades, so if it is too expensive you can buy the books and know what material should be covered in any given year.

Good article, but long about special snowflakes. http://www.spiked-online.com/spiked-review/article/the-crisis-of-character/17691#.VoKKtfkrKUn

For excommunication, I believe that is a no. For disfellowship, I'm not sure.

People do change; but going into a marriage with him being an atheist and the hope that he will change is the wrong way to start off a marriage. You've got to accept the person as they are and accept the fact that there is a very strong likelihood that they will remain that way for this life. Are you willing to accept that he may never come to church, he may never bless your home with the Priesthood, may never baptize your kids, may never take you to the temple. You simply have to accept those things as a reality before marriage. Marrying an atheist? Nope, very strongly against it-I will condemn it. As much as religion is a worldview and a way of thinking the same is true for atheism-it gets to the root core of who we are, how we act, what are goals are in life. People can claim to be good people and be atheist, and that may be true-they very well might be good people. However, atheism as a philosophy and a way of life cannot sustain society nor can it teach society to be moral, just, good over the long term. Everyone's goal is to maximize our happiness-even the drug addict is doing his best to maximize his happiness. The farther in the future we are able to see, the more likely that we will do things today that while in the short-term seem to make us unhappy they will in the long-term make us very happy. It boils down to the simple truth that if there is no hereafter, the time horizon for an atheist to maximize their happiness is their death. Therefore as a philosophy and a way of life underlining everything for an atheist is what can I do to live as long as possible and be as happy as possible during that lifespan. What that ultimately means that as a way of life, the moment that an atheist believes that their current situation is not making them happy, they will immediately start to change it regardless of the consequences to other people. Which means it is okay for them to lie or cheat if necessary if they believe it will make them happy. It becomes a very narcissistic way of life. For a person of Faith, we recognize that sometimes we have situations where we do things that cause pain and harm to us personally, with the faith and hope that those decisions will reap rewards in the hereafter. Marriage is a perfect example. For an atheist, if the marriage becomes difficult why bother sticking around? For a couple of Faith, they believe that while it is difficult it will be worth it because they made a covenant to God. All the major life decisions, when to have kids, how many kids to have, why are we having kids, how do you raise kids, what kind of household should we have, are material things really important, do both spouses work, what activities to do, etc. Literally everything is affected by those two diametrically opposed worldviews-one of faith, one not of faith. I recognize that modern culture has sold you a big fat lie about love and romance. Every movie you watch all that matters is that the two people "love each other", yet that can't even define it. It is so squishy and fleeting, a mirage is what movies and hollywood sell, but it ain't the real thing. Yet, I can define it. True love and loving each other is about sticking with each other through the good and the bad. True love is forgiving your spouse and being a helpmeet when they have an addiction to porn; true love cleaning up the vomit on the floor after they have had the flu, true love is being by your spouse when they have a disease or are terminally ill-visiting them in the hospital every day for months on end when you have a full-time job and kids or 100 other things to do, true love is picking up your spouse from the airport from a business trip at 11pm and not complaining, true love is self-sacrifice it is about building each other up and honest to goodness through hell or highwater being side-by-side with that person. It ain't the glamorous things that make true love-it is what happens in the daily grind of life that determines true life. Life is hard enough as it is and believe me-it can be very, very hard-soulcrushing hard. Starting it off with someone of the same faith can make those soulcrushing hard moments just a little bit easier. My favorite video about love from the Church:

Not to threadjack, but man . . . Bishops are generally 5 year stints so this occurred while he was Bishop? I feel sorry for the ward and this man and his family; to be called of God and then to lose it all . . . that sucks.

ss, The first step is to have the desire to believe and you are on that path. Faith is a choice-never forget that; we have to choose to believe. I believe what you are seeing in your father is a fulfillment of what will occur before the 2nd coming; the scriptures say that men's hearts shall fail them. I think it means not just having fear but that men will cease to believe. A couple of favorite videos of mine: https://www.lds.org/media-library/video/2011-11-020-mens-hearts-shall-fail-them?lang=eng https://www.mormonchannel.org/watch/series/mormon-messages/the-hope-of-gods-light

I took PP to mean that she is not the one who bares the burden of change or of the sin. No man is an island, so the effects of his sin will be felt to her and her family. She can't carry his burden for him. Putting password protection on the internet, monitoring, etc. is putting the burden of the sin on her and that isn't right. He is the one who needs to self-monitor. She'll feel the effects of it and for that she will need the Savior. She will need to be the best wife, she can be-loving, patient, forgiving, etc. and for that she will need the Savior. He will need to change and for that he will need the Savior.

I'll give you the advice you don't want to hear. You already know the answer-you just are refusing to accept it. That refusal to accept the answer you know to be right will lead to much heartache in your life. Obeying the Law of Chastity when you are young and in love is hard enough as it is, you make it even harder on yourself when you are the only one who believes in it and the other person does not. For an atheist there are only two reasons not to have sex out of wedlock; STDs and babies and both of those are overcome by "protection". No matter what he claims or how strongly he claims to say to you about how he might believe sex before marriage is wrong--deep down in today's modern society there is absolutely no way he can be an atheist and firmly believe it. Not believing in a God, means not believing in scriptures and the scriptures are the only thing in our modern society that makes the claim, definitively sex before marriage is wrong. I'll tell you the other thing you don't want to hear; continue down this path and you will have sex with him. If that is what you desire then you will get it; if you desire to stay true to God then you already know what you have to do.

Sounds like you are doing a pretty good job, so I'd ignore what the other parents are doing. Personally, I think up until about 13 is when you teach strict obedience and discipline. If you do your job right and your kid doesn't choose to be screwed up from 13-17 is the time to mentor the child. The time to have the noose tight is when they are young when they don't know any better, then slowly but surely loosen it up as they get older, allow them to make the right kind of mistakes and learn from them. If by the time they are 17/18 they aren't pretty much self-regulated then they aren't going to be self-regulated when they get out of the house. Then they will find all this freedom with no one to tell them what to do and then there is no telling which way they will go. Good job, keep it up; I hope when I'm there I'll be like that too. The only thing I would caution about is being their best friend being buddy, buddy. Best friends don't discipline you when needed. Sometimes, I think parents set being a best friend to their child above being a parent and the two are completely different and play different roles. I don't think you have-but it is easy to get the two mixed up. I'm closer to my Dad than anyone except my wife-but he is not my best friend; he is my Father and that relationship is much deeper than a best friend. I won't say things to him and I don't talk to him the same way as a best friend-why? because there is a measure of Respect, Gratitude and Love in that relationship that cannot be present in a best friend relationship.

If you can do without the internet; do it!!! And yes it would help the problem a lot. Granted he could buy magazines (but that is much less likely and he could store the images-but both of those are extra steps that can inhibit someone from seeking it out). If all you are using it for is netflix-I'd say toss it, but that it just my 2 cents. If you have a library nearby, you can read books or even get movies from the library vs. the internet.

+1. Yeap, just because it's "normal" as in a large percentage do it doesn't mean it is good at all. That's one of the reasons why we are here-to overcome our base instincts, the natural man and to become something more-to become like our Heavenly Father.

When children enter into a marriage a lot of additional stress can accumulate. It is my personal belief that as a society and culture we have completely forgotten how to parent. How many times to people say STTE "raising 2 kids is soooo hard"! Yet just two generations ago people were raising 8+ kids. Up until a child is 2 they are the center of the universe, simply because they have to be b/c if they aren't bad things happen to them. From 18+ months on is the time to start training a child that they are no longer the center of the universe. The person that is the center of the universe is the spouse. A child can easily be potty trained @ 2, trained to pick up toys, etc. can speak, etc. Once they are walking they can start obeying simple commands and can be enlisted in helping around the house. If your husband complains about chores . . .well there is an easy fix to that. Show him that you've got the house handled, which doesn't mean you have to be doing it all, but that you are in charge of it. I bet if you had a chore todo list of things that need to get done and he starts to complain about chores, just show him your list. Well, honey this is my list of things to do today, I really could use your help doing xyz (clean bathrooms, vacuum, etc.). As for the toddler being clingy and whining . . .I'd put a stop to that real fast. The terrible two's are really more like 18 months to 3 years. As soon as any of my kids get clingy or whining, they are going down and to their room or in a corner, because sometimes Mom and Dad have more important things to do than hold a whining child and I will not hold a child like that. The great thing is that when my little toddler gets fussy, she will actually go sit herself in a corner without me telling her! I love it! Seriously, for raising adults, John Rosemond. https://www.facebook.com/johnkrosemond/?fref=ts Absolutely IMO no better. Read his books: http://www.amazon.com/Making-Terrible-Twos-Terrific-Rosemond/dp/0836228111 You can attend his parenting classes, the guy literally saved my marriage and my wife's mental sanity.

That is putting qualifiers on something that Jesus nor the scriptures ever said; and how long is long? You didn't change for 50 years!! The above statement is a cop-out and against the Gospel. How many times should I forgive me brother? 7x7 no, 70x7. The above statement is bunk and you know it. I do advocate patience and long suffering, but not at the expense of a person's mental health if the spouse is abusive. I do consider looking at porn a form of emotional abuse. It is devastating to the victim spouse and can damage the relationship beyond repair. You didn't advocate earlier long suffering; you said she had the right to drop him. Porn emotional abuse? Do I get to claim that a messy house is emotional abuse too? Do I get to claim that if my wife sits around all day doing nothing that she is emotionally abusing me because I don't feel that she respects the things I provide for her? What about if she works all the time and I never see her? What if I really want kids and she change her mind and doesn't want kids. What if she decides she's going to go inactive and starts drinking? Come on, man. Now you are just reaching and are looking for anything to justify your earlier comments. You used porn for 50+ years and because of that even though your wife never knew you emotionally abused her? She was never the wiser, but you were emotionally abusing her? That makes a mockery of those individuals who really are emotionally abused. Dude study up on what emotional abuse really is.http://liveboldandbloom.com/11/relationships/signs-of-emotional-abuseAnd emotional abuse is one of those things that shouldn't happen ever, yet let's look at1. They give you disapproving or contemptuous looks or body language. 12. They regularly point out your flaws, mistakes, or shortcomings. Yes I'm sure those two never happen in a marriage. If the above only constitute emotional abuse and emotional abuse is grounds for divorce, then every marriage in American should have grounds for divorce at one point or another. I get it, you used porn for 50+ years and were so ashamed of yourself and so disgusted that you felt that your wife should divorce you and as such you feel that anyone who does so their wife also has the right to divorce. You might feel that way, but the scriptures, GAs, and GC talks do not give any indication that this is the case. The solution to the porn problem isn't divorce it is rather to make the marriage stronger.

Please point me to where on this thread anyone has said or said anything like they "can't help it". Statistics are statistics-it only indicates what has occurred, and does not abrogate responsibility in any way shape or form. It can be very addictive, but that isn't saying anything about "can't help it"; just because something is addictive never means it's not their fault or they can't help it. It simply means that it can require a lot of fortitude, grit and mental determination to abstain. As such, and given the condition of the world, rather than have such disdain for everyone who doesn't want to metaphorically burn at the stake those that either deal with or have dealt with this issue, maybe we should simply recognize that it is an extremely difficult problem, a significant portion of men in the church deal with this issue, while it isn't morally right and is probably the biggest sin members of the men of the church deal with, if we castigate and advocate this as a divorcable reason a large percentage of families within the church would be broken up. The solution to the problem isn't to "mother your husband". And yes there is something very, very wrong in mothering your husband. Women who make comments like "I have 4 children" including their husband in it are not wives and are not treating their husbands with the dignity and respect that their husbands deserve as head of the household. The solution is to have better, stronger marriages, to set the husband in his rightful place as head of the household and to empower him to be the head with the woman as the heart of the home. That together the work hand in hand for the betterment of their family. Stronger marriages, that is the solution.

Who cares about what science says or thinks about anyone's libido. I was addicted for nearly five decades to porn and I have a lower libido. It is all about self-control. Actually science does say that there is a link between low libido and porn so you fit the bill. But yes, it is all about self-control regardless of anything else.