Leah

It's bad in Oregon today. I'm in the Portland metro area and woke up this morning to so much smoke and smell that I thought there had to be a fire right in the neighborhood. We're currently at 205.

I'm also curious as to how the government will look at the fact that they only knew each other over the Internet for th short time of two months, then he came here where they actually met for the very first time and were married about 24 hours later.

It just boggles my mind that some people think that the church is completely clueless and unaware when it comes to garment design. And so insensitive and evil because they never think to ask real people for input. SMH. Just in the three years I have been wearing garments, there have been a number of changes in design and fabrics. But, nooooo, there was never any thought given to design or feedback welcomed. SMH again.

I always find it ironic and hypocritical when someone declares someone else judgmental (thus making a judgment themselves) just because that someone disagreed with them. You don't want to wear your garments. You have made that abundantly clear. You feel very put out and would rather have a temper tantrum about it than listen to any advice. So why did you start a thread? Did you expect everyone to jump up and applaud you and tell you that you're right and that the wearing of garments you covenanted to wear is just plain mean and evil and that you're just soooo much smarter than church leaders about the whole subject of garment wearing? Did you expect to somehow get "permission" from strangers on the internet to abandon garment wearing? Did you expect pity for the horrible suffering of having to wear thin pieces of cloth? I mean, you are clearly not interested in any advice. Millions of people wear garments successfully every day for years and years and years. People in all shapes and sizes. People in all kinds of climates. People with medical issues that make them susceptible to over-heating. Young people, old people, people in all stages of life and physical ability or disability. Wearing garments hasn't killed anyone yet. Nor - let's be honest here - has it "hampered" the "quality" of their lives. As long as you maintain a selfish focus (yep, I said selfish) regarding garment wearing, you're never going to move past the point where you are at now. But it seems you don't want to give up the complaining. So, again, what is the point of coming here and starting a thread about garments when you are not interested in humbling yourself and changing your attitude. Are you going to add the comments here to litany of excuses of why wearing garments is such a horrible thing to be asked to do? And while you're at it, why don't you expand your campaign to all of those women outside of the church who wear those danged Spanx. Surely you are concerned that their quality of life not be hampered, either, right? If you think it's more important to be "comfortable" than to honor your covenants, you certainly don't need anyone's permission to exercise your free agency and toss your garments aside. I feel sorry for anyone who feels that some simple bits of cloth "hampers" the "quality" of their life. Having been endowed in 2012, a year after I joined the church, I simply cannot imagine NOT wearing the garment.

Oh, for crying out loud. Do you not know the difference between different styles of writing? "Romance" writing is a vague, self-identifying term. Do you really believe that themes of degradation, bondage, rape and abuse fall under "romance writing"? Is that the type of "romance" you think women of the church should strive for in their lives? And please provide documentation that every single author out there subscribes to the same "guideline" you tout? Is there a form you have to sign? Do publishers everywhere decline to publish you if you haven't signed the magical form on some mythical "guideline"? If you don't join this exclusive club of "official" romance writers are there consequences if you dare to publish your work and call it a romance novel? Do you get fined? Arrested? Shunned from conventions? There actually was a former member of this very board who was (and is) very active in writing "erotica". If you were to check out the forums wherein such work is shared and lauded, it would disabuse you very quickly of the notion that "romance" is always and only the goal. The authors themselves will tell you so. And, again, why must a "romance" novel include graphic sex? A true romantic story can easily (and well) be told - whether via literature or motion picture or play - without any details of what goes on between the sheets. After my husband's death, I actually had a number of people tell me that I needed to write a book. Or at the very least, a short story or article. Would I have needed to include the details of our sex life for it to be considered romantic? And there are any number of therapists and other professionals who would be glad to educate you. Not to mention the words direct from women themselves. Or are they - and everyone else mentioned above - lying just for kicks and giggles. Do you have any clue that romance novels exist without needing to resort to the literary laziness of graphic sex scenes? Of acts and attitudes degrading to and abusive of women? But maybe I need to be reading some of those romance novels sold in Deseret Books. I guess I've been missing out not knowing that I could get my jollies reading the sex scenes that surely must be included in those, or otherwise they wouldn't be considered "romantic". It's laughable and ironic that you expect one person's opinion (in your link) to stand as proof positive that no how, no way, never, ever does any woman ever pick up erotica with the intention of getting herself aroused. Sure. Just like no man ever in history has picked up Playgirl or Penthouse with the idea of getting all hot and bothered. Nope, those magazines are always and only read just for the intellectual articles. And I guess Eowyn was just flat out lying about the woman she spoke of. Or do you also dismiss her with your random label of "nymphomaniac"? Like she is some kind of "other" that doesn't count as a woman? I know you're not such a delicate, sheltered little flower that the idea of women using masturbatory "assists" is beyond your comprehension. C'mon now. They just are more apt to use words as a device, rather than visual devices the way that men do. I am glad that we live in a land of free speech (sort of, as long as you don't give your opinion on the PC cause of the day or come across as "religious") and all that - people can write and publish any level of nonsense they want. But that doesn't make pornography - in whatever form it appears - a goodly and positive thing (unless you think exploitation is a good thing, I guess) that is going to somehow add to the plan of salvation. I'll keep passing on reading the likes of '50 Shades of Grey", thanks. If I'm in the mood to read something romantic, I'd much rather read something like the story of President Monson's long and happy marriage to his wonderful wife (may her memory be for a blessing), Frances.

There are readily available, simple solutions to each and every one of your physical complaints about garments. For example, you do not have to wear your bra over, you can wear it under. You can have garments custom made to your proportions, at no extra cost. I think for the most part that when someone is overly focused on the fit of the garment, the real problem actually has nothing to do with the physical aspect of wearing garments. LiteraeParakeet and Eowyn had excellent advice.

Nit-picky or not, but your first sentence is simply not true. There are women who do read certain novels with the conscious decision of making arousal their goal. You may not have met them, you may not have talked to them, but they do exist. Books like 50 Shades of Gray have nothing to do with "gooey" emotions or love. If a woman associates things love or "gooey" emotions with BDSM, emotional and physical abuse, degradation of women (or any human being) then that woman has a serious problem. Refuse to believe it all you want. Call it porn or don't call it porn. But sticking one's head in the sand doesn't change the reality that there are women who read this kind of crap because they want to get turned on. Do those of you pooh-poohing this truth also believe that there exists not a single man on the planet who looks at pictures of naked women in order to get aroused? Do you really not understand that there are women who use "erotic" novels in the same way that men use their visual porn? What's it like to live in such a naïve little world? So don't call it porn. Pretend that BDSM and emotional abuse are actually elements of a good ol' love story. But do you really think those themes bring the Spirit into our lives? Pardon me for a minute while I try to imagine members of the First Presidency or the Quorum of the 12 apostles bringing gifting their wives with such a book 'cuz they know they enjoy a good love story. Nope. Sorry. Never gonna happen.

When guys try to dismiss looking at the SI swimsuit issue as "normal" and innocuous, I have to wonder if they are actually in denial or just not wanting to give up an activity they enjoy. Guys don't look at nearly-naked women in "swimsuits" because they are interested in the swimsuit. They aren't looking at the pictures because they represent an awesome moment in sports....they are looking at those pictures because they enjoy being aroused by them. It's not like a woman in a bathing suit happened to cross their line of vision - it's a deliberate seeking out and looking at a particular kind of photo. It's the same thing when women read books such as '50 Shades of Gray'. You're not reading it for the compelling plot and awesome literary skills...you're reading it to get aroused. And I do believe the church addresses that kind of behavior very specifically and very clearly. But, hey, what do our leaders know? They're just uptight prudes, right?

It seems that the majority of people coming to internet forums for advice don't really want advice. They are looking for validation of their choices and then get their knickers in knot when someone dares to express something other than a "if it feels good, do it!" pat on the back. Estranged, how can you be at all surprised that someone would have concerns about an alcoholic medicating with marijuana....another addictive substance? Every recovering addict that I know who is striving to maintain their sobriety stays far away from addictive substances....legal or illegal. And are supported by medical professionals in looking for other answers for their legitimate medical symptoms (pain, etc) rather than jeopardize their sobriety with addictive substances. Marijuana may have medical uses, but it is not abenign nor harmless substance. So the fact that you are choosing to medicate with marijuana is certainly going to give pause to people. As it should. And all of that is without even factoring in Word of Wisdom issues. That part you will have to work out with Heavenly Father and those who have stewardship over you. But getting all huffy and judgmental and mad over the merest thought of having to give up your current mind-altering substance is not going to make your path any easier if you are genuinely interested in returning to the gospel.

I've never understood the advice from certain quarters to let a child skip church if they announce a desire (or whine) to not go. Will the response be the same for children who don't want to go to school or fuss about doing chores? You don't like it so you don't have to do it? Sure, there are those who will argue "it's different". The bottom line is he is the child and you are the parent. You get to make the rules and set the standards in your home. There is absolutely nothing wrong with church attendance being one of them. That is NOT "forcing it down his throat". Should parents just abandon taking their kids to church altogether in case it somehow, someday might or might not offend their sensibilities? You can set the pattern of attendance and require him to go. Why help him set a pattern of being inactive? Even adults can find it easy to fall into a long pattern of inactivity as the longer you don't attend, the easier it gets to simply continue with that pattern. Once he is an adult, he can make whatever choices he wants. But for now he is a child in your home, under your rules. Whether he chooses to have belief is up to him.

Rather hypocritical, given the kinds of things you say about others in every thread you start. If you can't (or won't) see the issues with being a bartender and and aren't mature enough to understand the childishness of your arguments.....well, the only one you're hurting is yourself. Just don't complain when some of the consequences of your choices are not to your liking. You only have yourself to blame.

Actually, you are the one making lots of judgments about everyone else throughout your various threads. The chip on your shoulder is very large. Whether or not the people in your Ward are rich or have gone to BYU or not, is completely irrelevant to your issues and the choices YOU make in your life. You cannot blame others for the choices you make. That's all on you. instead of making unrighteous and untrue judgments about everyone around you and playing the victim, the only actions you should be taking a look at are your own, and whether those actions and choices are in line with gospel principles.

Over react much? The advice that you find a different job was a legitimate concern. No need to lash out and criticize. Just because your job is "legal" doesn't mean it's a good or appropriate place to work. There are plenty of other kinds of work you could do, no matter what your supposed background is. What does going to BYU have to do with anything? There are millions of Mormons with jobs who never attended there. Contact the LDS employment specialist in your ward. Avail yourself of the resources at your community college. Get busy looking on Craigslist, etc. You can find another job if you try. There are ALWAYS better ways to make money.

In an earlier thread of yours, where you were felling pressured by family to attend the temple, you talked about the fact that you and your husband have both been inactive for quite some time and stated quite clearly that it was "mostly" because of how you felt you were being treated in the ward. Is this what you are referring to as "social anxiety"? If your bishop is aware of this previously stated reason for not attending church, then that most likely is a factor in his decision about your TR, as choosing to be inactive due to perceived slights is a different situation altogether. And there is most definitely a remedy for this situation, but it will require effort on your part. Everyone has to put forth sincere effort in order to be temple worthy so there are expectations for everyone. And, yes, it's "fair" that high expectations are held for temple recommends. It's in everyone's best interests. A woman in my last Ward had such crippling social anxiety issues that she has never held a job. But she is able to faithfully attend her meetings and hold callings. On my first trip to the temple to do baptisms (as an adult conver), she made her first trip ever to the temple. I felt honored to be a part of that. Just this past Sunday, a young woman whose family I know well, gave an incredibly moving testimony. She spoke of how, given her own choice, she would simply never leave her bedroom. But she attends all of her meetings every week and even teaches in RS. She spoke of how the only reason that she is able to do these things is because she loves the gospel SO much that she can overcome her anxiety to participate and share the gospel. That she actually gets so excited about the gospel that the anxiety simply cannot stand her way. She could just throw up her hand and say "I can't" but she has the faith that Heavenly Father will help her to do those things that need to be done. Doing those things necessary to enter the temple are always worth it.

It is only "largely a social experience" if that is what an individual decides to make of it. Attending Sunday meetings is not about having a social hour, even though there are those who seem to make that their focus. As others have stated, it is about things such as renewing your baptismal covenants in taking the sacrament, etc. You can attend your meetings at whatever level of "social" ability you desire. There are plenty of people who go to their meetings and participate more quietly, if you will. There is no need to be a social butterfly, turning church into a social experience instead of a spiritual one. No one has any issues with someone who attends sacrament being quiet and reverent instead of chatting throughout the meeting. You can sit quietly in the back of your other meetings and not participate in the discussions, if you don't care to. That said, temple attendance also requires social interaction. You won't be alone in the endowment room, etc. Bottom line is that it's up to your bishop and stake president to decide if you are worthy to attend the temple. It's not up to strangers on a discussion board and it won't make any difference to plead your case here. You need to - as does everyone who attends the temple - work with your leaders on doing the things you need to do to become temple worthy.

Haven't read every post in this thread yet, but just wanted to throw this out... In addition to the illegality of selling body parts (which - despite whatever PC words PP regurgitates to make it sound otherwise, is what they are doing), I have serious issues about the way in which they procure these "tissues" whether or not it is legal. From some of the research I have done (and I think it is at least hinted at in the video), I suspect that PP is less than straightforward - and probably downright dishonest - in convincing some of these women to "donate". While there are those women for whom abortion seems to have no moral implications (and women who have repeated abortions, basically using it as a form of birth control), it is still a very vulnerable situation to be in. I have no doubt that PP preys on the vulnerability...the guilt...whatever leverage that they can gain to convince these women that selling baby body parts is a "good" and "noble" thing.

Temporary, limited-use recommends are only for baptisms. They can be issued to youth or to new converts during the year wait to receive your endowment. I received mine a week after I joined the church. "Valid for one year" means exactly that. I used mine to do baptisms with other adults. I did not have to do a group recommend and it was good for as many times as I cared to go during the year it was valid. Of course, in a year's time, I received my endowment and then had a standard recommend. As I was an adult when I converted, I am not as familiar as others here on how often youth avail themselves of the individual limited-use recommends. I am sure someone else on the board will chime in. Edited to add: I see Anddenex responded while I was (slowly) typing. :)

You state yourself that you are searching for a "formula" which tells you how to get the most blessings for fast offerings. And your last sentence is still more "support" for your crazy hypothesis. Once again....giving service to others such as in the form of fast offerings is not about YOU. These things are not done so that you can rack up "blessing points". You can't purchase blessings. These are things that you should be doing regardless of whether you benefit personally or not. Although we are instructed to be generous in our fast offerings, there is no magic "formula" that ties the dollar amount to the number or quality of blessings you receive. Generosity also extends to the spirit in which you give and to the sacrifice that you make. Trying to come up some sort of formula by which you can "earn" the most blessings is far from the spirit in which fast offerings should be given. Trying to figure out if you give it all in one lump sum to boost your number and maximize your blessings is...well...I find it appalling, frankly. And you can't fool Heavenly Father. He sees far more than the dollar amount given or the contrived formula that someone thinks makes their fast offering "better".

I am still absolutely baffled by the obsession of (some) members with the pop (I grew up in the Midwest. It's pop) consumption of other members. Even occasional or moderate consumption. I don't think anyone has ever argued that pop is a healthy beverage (although you still see diet pop listed in menu plans for weight-loss diets). But the obsession and judgmentalism associated with this beverage is just bizarre. There were several women in my last ward who were very judgmental and just plain rude about the subject. One of these women ate more ice cream in a week than I do in a year, yet the fact that I ordered a Coke when we went out to eat once....no temple recommend for you and off to outer darkness you go! I suppose I should hope that no one ever finds out that I sometimes made Kool-Aid in the summer for my daughter when she was young.

You make it sound as though you are purchasing blessings. Do you really think that there is some formula set up - x fast offering equals y blessing? What would be the purpose of you withholding your fast offerings until the end of the year? How does that help ward members who have needs now? Fast offerings are collected monthly for a reason. Giving a fast offering isn't about how many blessings you can "earn" for yourself. It is about helping others in need.

I guess I have never understood why anyone would think they would get an answer in prayer that is different than church teaching. So you are somehow different...."special" than everyone else that you get a personal exemption that no one else does? I am guess I am just cynical enough to believe that someone people who said they prayed about it and Heavenly Father gave them the go-ahead.....didn't actually get that answer. They just tell themselves that they did because that is the answer they want to hear. We had a woman on this forum once state that she prayed about it, and Heavenly Father told it her it was okay for her to have sex with her boyfriend.

You don't know that. Not everyone puts all their business out there for public consumption so you have no way of knowing whether or not someone has been in your situation. You speak repeatedly of the ward members being judgmental and gossipy, when in fact, you are the one making unfounded judgments about them. I am not saying that you have to tell everyone what is going on in your life or with this relationship. It's not necessary for the whole world (or ward) to know every detail of your life. But to repeatedly pass judgment on others simply because they may or may not have had the same experiences as you, or they may or may not know what is going on in your life is not correct behavior on your part. Speak with your bishop. Get a referral for professional counseling to help you with these issues.

So what if people gossip? You are going to stay in a relationship - any relationship - just because someone might gossip? I think there will be more of that in your imagination than will actually happen in real life. I have no idea what you mean by "backfiring". You mention your boyfriend's size for what reason exactly? To imply that this makes him more dangerous? If this guy has physically assaulted you, what is your issue with the bishop calling the police? No one can "make" you press charges. However, in many jurisdictions, domestic violence charges are not dependent on you agreeing to press charges, it is automatically done by the jurisdiction. Why would you withhold this man's name from the police? Why would you not want his bishop to be notified? If he is behaving as you say he is, his bishop should be aware of the potential danger to other women. Why are you trying to protect him? Your viewpoint of being perceived as "undateable" if you break up with this guy or if is known that is abusive is warped. In fact, until you sort out with a trained therapist, the issues you have regarding relationships, the best thing for you would be not to date right now. A therapist can help you to learn the skills you need to make better choices and to better equipped to have a successful relationship.

Are you in therapy? With the issues you mention in this and your other thread, you would really benefit from it. Your bishop can give you a referral. Why are you worrying about "drama" if you dump the guy? Are you afraid he will retaliate? If that is what you mean by "drama" your Relief Society President, your home teacher, your bishop...all of these people are resources for hooking you up with the people who can help you do that safely.

I feel that way a lot lately. I look at the religious persecution all around (some of it even coming from church members!) and things like SSM, legal pot, and the Caitlyn Jenners of the world....and I am actually kind of relieved that I am closer to the end of my life than to its beginning because I don't want to see the things that are yet to come.