Leah
-
Posts
1159 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Posts posted by Leah
-
-
I think that depends on your definition of loved and cherished. Considering 2/3 of the US is fat and 1/3 obese, it seems that people are "used to it"
Personally I would love and cherish a fat wife but would not want to be seen in public with her.
If you would not want to be seen in public with her, then you cannot possibly love and cherish her. That is not how you feel about, nor how you treat, someone you love.
-
How many people stop going to church because they are offended? How many new converts fall away because they do not feel socially accepted? Stats don't lie and our church is not unlike many others in the social aspect of things.
If a testimony was all that people needed to be active our buildings would be bursting at the seams.... Clearly that is not the case.
I don't know. You tell me. Share your stats..your source of information.
-
You go to church for the gospel not as a social activity.... Granted there are a large number of "social Mormons" in fact most of the people you go to church with are there only for social reasons.
If you feel awkward in social situations and it sounds like you may have some deeper issues you should see a trained professional.
Really? And how do you know this?
-
Have you asked for a priesthood blessing? I know a woman who returned to the church after decades away. She was a smoker. Received a priesthood blessing and never smoked another cigarette. No withdrawal, either.
-
Because I've met a guy, claiming to be mormon. ( I found my faith before I met him) And he is pushing me, he wants to take the next step. And I really like him but, I don't want to do it. So, I just wanted to know cos, I don't feel like it should be the right thing to do.
If you are Mormon, then you know that having sex outside of marriage is wrong. If he is Mormon (why are you not sure that he is?), then he also knows that it is wrong.
If you don't want to do it, then don't. Any guy who would push you to have sex - especially when it is agains what you both have been taught - is not a guy you want - or need - to be with.
-
For how long did You date your husband/wife before you got married? And did you have sex before you got married?
Why do you want to know?
-
Really? Does everything need to be taken out of context? Does it need to be spelled out on a case by case basis? Come on.........
Still waiting for documentation of that "contract" you speak of, so I can read the part wherein gaining weight violates said "contract".
You made the statement in the context of this thread, so how am I out of context for asking you to back up your statement?
-
My parents aren't super open about me doing my own thing until I'm out of the house. And I don't plan on doing that until I get married. But I'm loving learning about the church and going to all the activities and classes.
So you are going to live at home until you get married?
Why would you do that?
-
I'm sure that someone as smart as you can make a distinction between. A genetic issue and someone who keeps stuffing their face with twinkies and twizzlers. Like it or not It guys marriage is a contract...... If your husband was a poor provider you would be on here complaining about that also.
Look we are off topic the question was can a man love a fat chick or something like that and I think that fundamentally the anwser is yes.
Since you are so certain about your 'facts', please provide us with the specifics of this "contract", so that we can see for ourselves the part wherein one's weight is addressed.
My late husband was a "poor provider" in the sense that he was unable to work due to health issues. I guess he broke the 'contract' and I should have been able to dump him and go merrily on my way due to the breaking of this supposed "contract"? He was also overweight at one point. Definitely breaking the 'contract'. Or does that only apply to women? Oh...and he also lost a leg. Definitely not the same man I married, according to your definitions. I guess it was just ignorant and silly of me to stay married to him.
To address the question asked by the OP...yes, a real man can love a woman, no matter what her weight is.
-
I'm sure we can all agree that your cousins husband is a jerk and that being over weight is not an excuse to have an affair. That said marriage is a contract if she gained a significant amount of weight the argurement can be made that she did not up hold her side of the contract. As she is clearly no longer the same person he married. This does not excuse his actions!
The question can a man be happily married to a fat woman... Sure there are chubby chasers out there (a chubby chaser is a guy who likes fat chicks) love is also more than skin deep at least it should be. But if your partner has issues with your weight as a woman shouldn't you address those issues? Don't you want your mate to be sexually attracted to you? If you as a woman get fat abd refuse to lose the weight Or stopping having sex with him because you don't feel sexy.....and your husband starts looking at porn is it really ALL his fault? No not really.....
Granted, I have not yet been sealed to anyone in the temple, but I had no idea that part of the ordinance included the woman agreeing to not weigh more than X number of pounds. You learn something new every day!
And if women should be required to address the "issue" of their weight...shouldn't we also address the issue of men being bald? Or gray haired? Or gaining weight? I mean, if a guy goes bald, he is "clearly no longer the same person" she married. Shame on him!
-
Well what if the lord is wrong about marijuana? I would guess that he didn't take the time a pleasure of smoking cannabis. And you cant judge something you haven't taken or used. All I am saying is a lot of things have changed. people used to think that the earth was the center of the solar system and now we know it isn't. Marijuana isn't a bad drug. And it can enhance some of your senses to a point. People have been brainwashed by the drug administration There are plenty of worse things out there like alcohol, caffeine, and cigarettes. I will be talking to my bishop about my experiences and I will let you guys know what he tells me. My parents already met with him today and I meet with him tomorrow.
So...you think you are wiser and more knowledgeable than God himself? You know more about cannabis than the creator of cannabis?
If you truly believe that, I daresay you've already destroyed more brain cells than you can afford to lose.
What is the point of your thread? Simply a feeble attempt at justifying being high? Do you really think these arguments will win over Heavenly Father when you are called to account?
-
Unfortunately, I don't have the time to answer you the way I wish. So to quell your curiosity, I will give you the short version: Yes, yes, yes...and I am a priest of God and Christ who has served Him faithfully in many callings and ventures since the day I was converted by His voice of truth.
Got to start my day; have a good one yourself.
Pretty evasive/vague answer. Why are you reluctant/unwilling to answer this in the straightforward manner in which it was asked?
-
Oh, Double Boo Hiss!
I'm LDS and I can play that game. You can do a search on the "evils" of certain bishops on this here forum. That doesn't make it at all significant enough to warrant a statement to support a case as generalized as the OP's. You are so jaded with your singular experience you are willing to paint an entire Church as such. Boo Hiss!
Your post made me mad.
It is clear that you cannot handle any criticism of the catholic church. That is your problem, not mine. For you to call me "jaded" for offering some facts from many years working for the catholic church...well...it is laughable. I related some factual experiences to illustrate that all priests are not as perfect and self-sacrificing as you would have us believe. I have far worse examples of far worse behavior that I could relate, but they are not relevant to the discussion.
"This here forum"?
Did I say anywhere that all bishops are perfect and blameless? What has that to do with my post? Just because I make factual statements about the behaviors of priests I worked for/with, doesn't in any way equate to my saying that everyone else on the planet is perfect. Nor did I say that all priests act in this manner. I guess it is okay to say negative things about the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, but not about the catholic church.
You have no idea what the totality of my experience with the catholic church is. You would probably be very surprised if you did.
I am still dismayed at the attack upon the OP (not just yours). It's really over the top. But then, that is the way some people react when others dare to disagree with their viewpoint.
I happened to have the opportunity this afternoon to discuss this question with a gentleman from our ward who, among his various callings, has held the calling of bishop. We had an interesting discussion on how some people are drawn to the Church, even say they have gained a testimony, but there are some things in their lives they are unwilling to give up. He related a number of examples he encountered as a bishop. I would think it not a far stretch to imagine that for many people who join the Church, they give some thought to those parts of their lives they will have to change if they join the church. I don't think it's inconceivable to imagine that someone who has made their living as clergy in another church, in making the decision to be baptized in the LDS church, will have the thought at one time that they will need to find another way of making a living. It is a purely practical train of thought, and one they will have to address at some point in the conversion process, in order to start making plans to find another way to earn a living. For those who choose not to join the Church because of this (if there are any such), perhaps they haven't gained a true testimony.
I knew a Christian pastor who converted to Judaism. In fact, he made the decision in the midst of giving a sermon one Sunday (his story is quite fascinating). Obviously, he had to find a new line of work. Fortunately for him, he was not judged harshly, the way he would be here, for asking himself the question "Do I believe this enough...is my faith strong enough...to abandon not only my previous religion, but my very way of earning a living?". That is not a minor thing to give up. I would venture to say that it has a bigger impact on one's life than giving up coffee. They are walking away from a whole way of living. Instead of judging...we should be grateful for their faith. But even though there are numerous posts on this forum chastising people for judging others....I guess some people think it is okay to judge as long as they get to do the judging.
-
Okay, stop the presses.
Just because you don't get paid for it doesn't mean it's not a real job. I'm going to do a BOO HISS!!! on behalf of all Stay-At-Home-Moms on the planet.
Imagine a missionary - leaving their jobs, leaving school, leaving their families to spend 2 years on a mission. Well, guess what. Catholic Priests do that entire bit for their entire LIFETIME! You know how we always tell our missionaries - don't even think about a girlfriend, just do your mission for 2 years. Well, Catholic Priests don't think about girlfriends or wives their entire lifetime.
Pastors and Priests work like missionaries do. They get paid by their respective Churches so they don't have to worry about their sustenance. They can concentrate on the mission field. LDS Bishops don't have lifetime bishop callings.
And no - all the Catholic Priests and Nuns that I know - and I am very close to a lot of them - do not believe the LDS Church is true because they have a testimony from the Holy Spirit that the Catholic Church is true. Now what - you're going to tell them that your Holy Spirit is better than their Holy Spirit?
I don't get the over-reactions to the terms used.
I think Brother Ray's point was clear - that there are clergy who are paid to be clergy. If they were to convert to the LDS church, they would no longer have the job that they support their families with, thus necessitating finding a new job. He is simply wondering if that might be a stumbling point for some. I don't think he was making any sort of judgment, as having the thought - if even for just a moment - of "How do I support my family now?" is perfectly natural.
And don't even get me started on Catholic priests. I worked for the Catholic church for many years, along with a large Catholic institution. While there may be some orders who take a vow of poverty, their residence (some parish priests even having their own private home) is provided, housekeeping is provided, food, clothing, car, health care....and I knew plenty of priests who had more disposable income than most "civilians", complete with very expensive hobbies. They don't have to worry about where their next meal is coming from or if they can afford medical care. Something their parishioners worry about a lot. I had the audacity to ask one priest that I worked for about it, and he became irate and shouted about a 'promise', not a 'vow', as if that somehow explained things.
-
If you are woman #1, have you ever thought about leaving? Since you are the only one working, you will not suffer the loss of his income (one reason some women stay in bad marriages).
Why do you stay if he is beating you and your child? What prevents you from leaving? Do you think it is a good idea to stay with someone who is beating your child? It may not feel like it, but you do still have choices. You do not have to stay with someone who is beating you and your child.
-
A few questions for consideration and discussion:
How do you respond when someone willfully misinterprets what you say or write, imputing to you ideas and positions that you never claimed? Do you gently correct them? Call them a liar? Ignore them? Does your response change if you correct their misperception and they ignore you and continue to misinterpret you?
At what point are people responsible for their misinterpretations? If you said or wrote something they misinterpreted, the problem might lie with your speaking or writing, not with their understanding. But if you have taken pains to express yourself clearly and they continue to misinterpret, at some point are you justified in concluding that they are either (a) dishonest or (b) thick as a brick?
That's kind of a tough one.
I think genunine misunderstanding is pretty simply and easily identified. And I think both parties are able to acknowledge the misunderstanding.
Willful misinterpretation is frustrating. My personal opinion is that it, too, is usually easily identified. Perhaps I am a cynic, but I think when this happens, it is more often dishonesty, than a lack of intelligence.
I don't think I will ever understand those who think they know better what someone else is saying than that person knows themself! For me,,,they are my words, I said them, I am the one who knows what I meant to say! If someone repeatedly insists that I am saying something I am not...it is hard to feel respect for them.
-
This is what I mean by an honest discussion turning into a war of who's right and whose wrong! It's a bit ridiculous, reads like a lawyer trying to make their point in court
At any rate, I'm not going to exchange in a heated debate of tit-for-tat, I have other things to do. When the pursuit of truth becomes a war of contention, we've lost it's essence already.
But wasn't that exactly the point of your posts? To tell Vort and others here that they/we are wrong?
Or are you just mad that not everyone agrees that you are "right"?
What is a discussion forum fo, if not debate and "tit-for'tat"? Isn't that how it works? Someone makes a statment, someone else responds to that statement. Or do you just expect to make statements and not have them responded to or - horrors! - challenged?
-
I'm not too interested in getting into that, but if it helps you, just one example is...
More than that...it is the general tone that you are right and I am wrong, which I don't see it that way.
I'm fine with being a High Priest and having my view. Your expectations of others in the church and me is about you, so if I'm not responding to your points and waving them off, it is because I don't care to continue to rehash the same things with you. I understand your point of view. I just disagree with it. And I think it is OK in the church for various views to exist.
Perhaps if you had some doctrinal quotes or teachings, I could respond to that. But it isn't worth it for me to respond to:
That is just your opinion, and you can have it.
It is confusing that you accuse Vort of not having humility, but when he asks for evidence of that, you respond that you are "not too interested in getting into that". Why make the accusation, then?
I see nothing prideful in Vort's words. I see him standing up for the teachings of the church.
If you think his experiences with his ward are "prideful", then I guess I am "prideful", too, as I have never had any experience with the people putting down other churches in my ward...and especially not in talks in sacrament meeting. Indeed, I see the opposite, where the good and the truth is other churches, is acknowledged and respected.
It almost seems that you are asking us to feel ashamed of our church.
Isn't it a little (or a lot) prideful for you to come here and purport that you know better than the church's teachings? You want everyone to agree with your personal viewpoint, and when they don't, it "isn't worth it" for you to engage with them. Yet you are the one who made the claims that are being responded to. Did you just expect everyone to say "Oh yeah...the Church is wrong and you're right!".
I am sure you will say it is not. I find it ironic that you will bring forth quotes from church leaders to try to "prove" your point, yet at the same time, you purport to know better than these leaders.
-
I looked at some of these sites when I was investigating the church. I found that many posters didn't even have their facts straight about what it was they were so incensed about!
And for people who want nothing to do with the Church anymore....some sure do spend a lot of time and energy on talking about it. It causes me to speculate about why they can't let it go and move on with their lives.
-
I can relate to James12's approach.
I do the same thing. The first step is just GETTING IT OUT and DOWN on paper. Don't worry about flow or sounding - just get it out and tangible. Once this is done, then you can go back, and edit or just improv, using bits and pieces as cues while up at the podium.
Again, excellent advice. I like this approach because it also allows room to be guided by the Spirit on the actual day.
-
If possible, do not read your talk, it makes me sleepy. Second, personal experiences about the topic (I find members in general love "story time")
I totally get what you mean about reading your talk. I practiced this afternoon and - if the nerves don't get to me - I think I strike a good balance between having the general thoughts written down and not just standing there reading it word for word. To me, there is a difference between a "talk" and a speech.
Your advice about personal experiences is encouraging. Generally, in my ward, a convert's first talk includes their conversion story. We are not assigned topics in my ward, but this seems to be a general understanding. So I prayed about it, and thought about the reference in my patriarchal blessing to my conversion and the impact the story would have on people...and that was the direction the words seemed to flow when I sat down to write. Besides, I am far from expert on any topic, but I am "expert" on my own conversion story!
I found it far easier to fill up the time than I thought. I don't know if that is good or bad! :)
-
Very effective approach you have here.
There's a saying about a pot....and I believe a kettle.
Which one were you trying to be?
I fail to see where the above quote is at all relevant to my post.
Some people are afraid to read the Book of Mormon. Some people are afraid of the truth, as they would then have to change behaviors that they are not interested in changing. Some people are afraid of finding out that they are wrong about something. It is this kind of fear that keeps some people from reading the Book of Mormon.
There are heterosexuals who do not want to recognize that sex outside of marriage is wrong, because they don't want to have to give up having sex with whomever they choose.
Some people don't want to read the Book of Mormon, learn about the church, etc., because they are afraid that it might be true after all, and there are things/attitudes/behaviors they are reluctant to give up.
No kettles or pots here.
-
Once again I seem to be making another 'last' post. I am sorry but what you have just said shows you have very little understanding of how Biology works. I am no expert but just because a gene is present does not mean it is active. The gay gene is most likely a recessive gene meaning that if a dominant (straight) allele is present then the person will not turn out be homosexual which explains why the majority of people are heterosexual.
You may think I come across as showing qualities which are not those which I aspire other people to have. I would say two thing's: I am not perfect and no I do not totally follow what I preach but I try my best to. Secondly I am not hiding behind pretending to be loving. I am here because I am loving, I think your religion and religion in general can come in the way of being totally loving to all, hence why I can come across as trying to prove I am right.
I love you all hence why I care so much about trying to share what I think is most important about how to live life.
In regards to the evidence just because there is opposing evidence does not mean I am therefore unable to come to a conclusion, and I did not say there was an equal amount of opposing evidence.
Wrong. You have no idea what I know about biology.
YOUR approach to 'biology' seems to be seeking out those sources - legitimate or not - that "prove" your theory. Others here have pointed out to you that your links do not, in fact, prove your theory. You choose to ignore that, because it doesn't fit your needs.
If you had ANY understanding of this church, you would realize it is loving to all. However, you think anyone who does not hold your personal point of view is not loving. You are being judgmental and are attempting (badly) to shame people into accepting your viewpoint, implying that they are not "loving" if they don't share your mindset.
Of course you came to a conclusion. You cherry pick your "facts" and "conclude" that which you have already decided.
I still challenge you to read the Book of Mormon with an open heart and an open mind and seek honestly to know if it is true or not. Or are you too scared?
-
Time management issues are probably one of the most commonly easily avoidable talk 'offense'. There are a couple ways to help deal with it, the simplest is probably to read your talk aloud to yourself with a timer/stop watch. Just give yourself some wiggle room due to changes in cadence due to nervousness. Some people speak fast and some people speak slow. If you're a minute or two off it's not a big deal (assuming it's not a 2 minute time slot to begin with), but when you go 10 minutes over or under it's a bit of a problem as you rob time from or put someone else on the spot.
What is the most easily avoidable talk offense? Blaming the Bishopric for your talk.
One last thought that can help streamline things, include any scriptures or quotes you want to share in the talk itself (as in your printed version), don't just put a scripture or ensign reference with the idea you'll flip to it when the time comes. It's just one more thing that can go wrong, it's a Murphy's Law kind of thing.
Also excellent advice.
I'll never forget the woman who basically took all but a couple of minutes of the last speaker's time, in addition to her own time. It was really awkward. I do not want to be that woman!
Maintaining physical appearance part of marriage contract?
in Preserving Marriage between a man and a woman
Posted
Great!
Then you won't be bothered when you get dumped for your flaws.