Leah

I don't know if there is a typical. I received a calling the first week. I've even heard of people waiting months or years.

So, you are saying that there is a state law that trumps the federal law that prohibits you from opening your spouse's mail? Which state is this? Could I have a link to that, please. I was recently dealing with a situation concerning mail tampering and I would be interested in this information. The attorneys made no mention of there being any state laws that overruled this particular federal law.

What is the real issue? Your first post was about smoking. Now you have posted a whole bunch of other behaviors. After reading your latest posts, I don't think the smoking is the problem.

This is a big factor in why I haven't seen a movie in a theater in ages. And it's not just the kids, at least as often, I find that it is the adults being loud and disruptive. That includes places like church, too.

Are you ever able to post anything regarding health without taking a jab at overweight people? The (inaccurate) generalization is bad enough - and your assumption that anyone who disagress with your stance must be overweight - but the disdain and moral judgement-making....wow. You have a clear bias. Why is it acceptable to have THIS prejudice? I am assuming you wouldn't have such an attitude against a race (I could be wrong), why is size bias okay? There is a serious issue here.

Not to mention the whole attention-span issue for a toddler.

Oh, so serious. I never felt any compulsion to read my husband's mail or email. If there was something in the mail I needed to know about, he'd tell me, and vice versa. But I would never open it unless he asked me to for a specific reason. Same with his email. I didn't need to be (nor should I be) party to every 'live' conversation he had, so why should that change because the conversation is happening over email or text? I don't need to "hear" the conversations about this or that car repair or football game...or what he's getting me for my birthday. And I am sure he would have been bored to tears by most of my conversations with my girlfriends. Of course, all bets are off if a cheating husband is involved. I don't think there is necessarily a right or a wrong here, other than the fact that some think that the act of being married automatically means you are not entitled to any privacy ever. I have encountered people who think their marriage is somehow "better" because they have a joint email account or because they leave the bathroom door open. That somehow those who choose differently have something to hide and don't have a good marriage.

Your "personal ideal" is also in compliance with federal law, as it is a violation of federal law to open any mail that is not addressed to you (yes, even your spouse). So...stay on your wife's good side.

Do you think the church does not have access to educated, experienced translators?

Even married people are entitled to privacy. It doesn't mean one is hiding things or being deceptive.

I like this approach. I would simply do as you would normally do with your family, and, as Beefche advised, just answer questions if and when they come up. I think brief glimpses of garments are bound to happen from time to time...medical situations, locker rooms, etc. Some people will ask questions, some won't. If you act like it's normal (which it is), chances are less that someone else will freak out about it. The only times I can think of when non-church members have seen my garments (other than my daughter doing my laundry) have been in medical situations....from a car accident to regular doctor appointments. No one got weirded out. I can only remember one comment and that was the nurse in the ER - as she was helping me get into a hospital gown - was "You must be Mormon".

You can't "hope" things away. If you wanted to change your attitude regarding your wife's past, then it was up to YOU to take action. You should have resolved your issues prior to marriage. If you couldn't resolve them, then the marriage shouldn't have happened. Marriage was not going to magically fix your issues. Marriage wasn't going to magically undo your wife's past. If you couldn't deal with the fact that she "had a past" while you were dating her, you certainly weren't going to be able to deal with it simply by getting married. You had no business reading your wife's journals. What was the purpose of that? I am not going to address your wife's actions. We only have your version. Her version might be different.

If it's about intent, then any gambling is potentially okay. I know a lot of people (non-members) who occasionally play the slots or whatever, just for fun. They set a budget, play until that budgeted money is gone, and then quit. But I've never read where the church teaches that that is okay because their "intent" is just to have fun.

Singular and plural.

I just took the quiz and it absolutely nailed it for where I was born and grew up. Two of the cities were spot-on and the third just a short distance away. I found that pretty interesting as I have lived away from that area for almost as many years as I lived there.

Yep, that's definitely obscene. Anything having to do with peas is obscene.

But what has that got to with anything? Edited to add: The question isn't directed at you. I am just wondering why the OP brings it in as an issue. As you state, rededication is rare.

I still don't understand your objections. It is common practice for temple to be open to the public for tours prior to dedication. This is a wonderful thing. It allows people who have never seen the inside of a temple to see it and to learn its' purpose. It is a wonderful way to reach out to non-Mormons AND to Mormons who don't currently hold a recommend. You never know what the tour may spark in someone's soul. Once the temple is dedicated, it's back to business as usual. Only those with a temple recommend may enter. If one truly understands what the temple is about, they would have no problem with that. I don't know what you mean by "they could go back when its rededicated". Could you explain that statement, please? I don't understand your issue with stating that - after the open house - you can only go back if you have a recommend. That's just a statement of fact. If the non-Mormons taking the tour listened, they should understand that. Some people perhaps can't grasp that. Some people just use it as a way to attack the church. As for any Mormon who doesn't currently hold a temple recommend, they can always - at any moment - start working towards being worthy of a recommend. One is only barred by the temple by one's own chosen actions. I knew when I joined the church what the temple was all about, and what was required of me to enter and receive my endowment. So I spent that first year diligently working towards that. Anyone can do that. So, it's not "final" if one doesn't currently hold a recommend. Not even for non-Mormons. Visiting and understanding what the temple is all about may spark in their interest in the church and set them on a path to one day being able to enter the temple for their own endowment.

I grew up there. I am NOT homesick today.

I don't understand what you are upset about. It's not a new thing for there to be tours for the public before it is dedicated.

Perhaps he is showering so often because he knows you hate his smoking and he is not trying to hide it, but rather be sensitive to your need not to smell it since he knows how much you hate it? The same with the breath-holding. Per your posts, this is the only thing he lies about. He may feel backed into a corner at this point. He also needs a support system that includes professional medical and emotional/mental support. Very few people can quit cold turkey or on their own. I think also loving support by someone from the Church would be helpful, as there is also that issue of smoking being against the WoW. You didn't address why you are no longer going to Church. It may not be the smoking addiction that is "taking away" his affection for you. Lots of smokers are happily and succesfully married, even if the other spouse disaproves of the smoking. What may be impactinng his affection may be a lowering of his self-esteem since you have expressed a desire to abandon the marriage over this.

Separations rarely help a marriage. If you separate, you need to accept ahead of time that it may be permanent. It sounds like he has been smoking for most of your marriage. You have stayed with him all of this time, even had children with him....why is the smoking a deal-breaker now, and not when it started? Is it because of joining the church? Did the two of you have some sort of understanding? Some sort of deadline for his quitting? It sounds like he needs help to quit smoking, not criticism. The criticism, along with the threats to leave, aren't helping the situation. It is probably making it even harder for him to quit. Quitting smoking is rough. He probably lies to avoid your negativity. I am not saying he's right, just that that is a possibility. Why are you not going to church? Was it a joint decision? He should not stop going to church just because he is smoking (if that is his reason). He needs the support there. He can talk to the bishop, his home teachers....ask for a referral to counseling...ask for a blessing to quit....there is lots of support to be had. Why are you not going to church? Because you are mad at him? Does your testimony hinge on his? See the bishop. Get counseling. The smoking issue can be resolved.

See Dravin's post. He nailed it.

It seems to me that you did indeed state that the nuns do have the gift, as you stated you have the gift constantly, while stating that they only have "this gift" in "bursts".

Yes, I knew that. I never said it was part of Girl Scouts. We chose something other than GS deliberately. Only to end up in an organization with no values at all. Other than to keep leaders no matter what kind of behaviors they engaged in. We wanted an organization that our daughter could join to make friends, have enriching experiences. Instead, her safety was put in danger, she was exposed to drunken adults at an offical function, and was the target of despicable behavior instigated by the leader and other adults. We went all the way up the chain of command and no one in the organization saw the slightest thing wrong with the behaviors of the adults involved. If this kind of behavior happend through say, Boy Scouts...alcohol at an official function, ignoring childrens' safety (not to mention the law) by transporting children without seatbelts....I doubt too many parents would sit idly by, nor would the organization condone such behavior.