jerome1232

I may have done a disservice to Pres. Oaks' talk.  I listened to it again and was reminded that there was much more to the talk. The greatest theme was loving our enemies.  But in the backdrop of the political climate today, he made some interesting statements.
American's don't have to choose "between" their own cultural heritage and the American Heritage.  We can have both.  But it is the understanding that we are united under the Constitution while allowing ourselves all the diversity of culture we may want.
I'm going to guess that this is most applicable to the far left.  Wanting to defund police and to get rid of the Constitution.  There can be a "black culture" or "latino culture" or "asian culture" as long as it accepts the Constitution as a governing document for civil interaction.
I'd believe I'm a fairly good example of that.  I'm always talking about Korean stuff.  I'm proudly of Korean heritage.  But I absolutely believe the US Constitution to be divinely inspired.  And the more we stray from it, the closer we get to a dark age.

If your point is that the Republicans are liars and hypocrites, then I grant your point. The fact (and it is a fact) that the Democrats are far worse doesn't justify the Republican hypocrisy. But this is nothing beyond political gamesmanship. You can bet that the Democrats, in this position, would do exactly the same thing. Their pearl clutching on this matter is political theater, nothing more.
Consider: The Supreme Court has had a leftist majority for the entirety of our lifetimes. The political left sees a leftist Supreme Court as their inherent right. And that is what is really at stake here. Why shouldn't the Supreme Court take a conservative bend? The Left sees this as unacceptable and will thus do everything in their power to prohibit it. Meanwhile, the Republicans are 100% within their right to nominate and confirm the justice of their choosing. How does the Left respond? With a threat to burn the entire house down by packing the court under a Biden presidency.
Rail all you want against Republican hypocrisy. I might even join you. But don't lose sight of what's really going on here. As is almost always the case, the real, deep evil being done here is being done by the Democrats. The Republicans are mostly garden-variety fools and jackasses. The Democrats are something far more sinister.

I love that book!
For me it's The Dragon Reborn, book 3 of the Wheel of Time. The series seems to be a love or hate type of thing. I'm currently re-reading it (the series) before I read the last book, A Memory of Light, book 14.

So much “woke” feminist garbage in this article.
The progressive woman have become a huge thorn in teaching doctrine now-a-days due to the feminist movement. Just like testifying of the roll of men and woman in the home and the innate value of a baby fetus, Talking about the truth of modesty is social suicide. 
But here I go cause there is no society I am worried about here.
claim 1: women were taught not to wear scandalous attire so men wouldn’t be tempted.
Yes young women were taught this. As found in the gospel topics section on churchofjesuschrist.org:
”Central to the command to be modest is an understanding of the sacred power of procreation, the ability to bring children into the world. This power is to be used only between husband and wife. Revealing and sexually suggestive clothing, which includes short shorts and skirts, tight clothing, and shirts that do not cover the stomach, can stimulate desires and actions that violate the Lord’s law of chastity.”
 clearly there is a problem here. Clearly immodesty can lead to temptation and I don’t know anyone that would argue that. 
Lindsey’s (the author) approach to this is an “every man/woman” for his/herself approach. As long as what she is doing is not affecting her, than everything is ok. It is so frustratingly un-Christlike and has only fed to the raging feminist fire that has spread into our church.
Yes. ONE reason to dress modestly is so not to arouse sexual feelings in others. Men should do the same. If I find out that something I am doing or wearing causes lustful feelings in women or homosexual men, the I better stop right away. I know what it is like to struggle with thoughts and I don’t want to be the source of any one else’s evil thoughts. 
That is the Christlike way.
 
claim 2: modesty is a woman’s issue
No one is teaching this, it’s just a harder thing to do if you are a woman. I definitely had modesty lessons, but it was more about appearing clean and acting appropriately.
This is another feminist situation where because it is more difficult for woman, they see it as oppressive and evil. 
Claim 3: we can tell people what to wear
This is just an extension of claim 1 and 2
I can agree with her at point here. If the story she tells about her “pink” shirt is true, I wouldn’t have worried to much about it. But If I wore a Trojan shirt, that would definitely be considered immodest and I would not wear it. It’s different levels of the same principle. If you are worried someone might look at your t-shirt with a Victoria secret logo and feel aroused, dont wear it.
claim 4: priesthood leaders are attracted to young woman 
This whole section she has is completely idiotic. She tells the story of when she was at girls camp and the young woman leaders forced the young woman To dress modestly for when the bishopric comes and speaks.
In the mornings and evenings, my wife does not wear a bra under her shirt. However, If we have guests coming over she goes and puts one on so her nipples are poking through her shirt. Additionally, I have a pair of shorts that are short, tight, and “revealing”. I like wearing them to bed, but if I’m having company over in the morning or evening, I’m going to change out of them, especially if one of them coming over is female.
Other nonsensical statements 
1. “If a claim cannot be supported by scripture, or perhaps a recent general conference talk: don’t teach it.“
 The irony here is so thick I can’t even cut it with my metaphorical lightsaber. She says this in her explanation of a quote from a 70 from 1974. Additionally, giving prophetic direction an expiration date is what leads to apostasy.
2. “The claim that women have stewardship over another man’s thoughts is nowhere to be found in the scriptures. In Elder Jeffrey R. Holland’s talk To Young Women, there was no mention of young men depending on the women to keep them clean.”
Jeffery R Holland also taught “although I am not my brother’s keeper, I am my brothers brother”. Stop making this mortal life a free-for-all. 
When I’m with my friends, we make fun of each other and laugh at our mistakes together. But If one of my friends struggles with depression, I’m going to be more careful about the things I say.

Sell the ox or fill in the mire.
 

We ended up working it out with the realtor to do it on Saturday 🙂

So no, no chapel with a view into the baptistry. That's just the waiting room which is adjacent to the confirmation rooms, to each side.
 
Ps: open house was great. There were a ton of people there. I loved the celestial room, it was beautiful.

SPOILERS!!!!!

Maybe say something like "I really like you and appreciate the time we've spent together but I'm addressing some personal issues right now and need to take a break to get my stuff together. I hope it won't take too long but I hope you'll support me and still be interested in continuing to date in a few months after I'm more of the person I want to be."

My wife @Dollfacekilla and I have been married for 12 years.  
And this coming Saturday...
...at the Philadelphia Temple...
...we're getting Sealed.  
..finally.  
Just, ya know, thought some of you might like to know 
 

If you are seeking to understand what your LDS acquaintances said and probably meant, then the answers in this thread will help you. If you're seeking to establish your definitions of words as the final, definitive truth, then to be blunt, this whole thread is a waste of everyone's time, including yours.

Just to hit something specific, you mentioned Paul saying it's better not to marry.
Context, context, context. Yes he did say that. But he was answering a specific question, and we don't know what that question was. It's important.
I can think of a contemporary example that illustrates this. Elder M. Russel Ballard said at a meeting I was at in regards to church history that "research isn't the answer"
Wow! I saw on the internet people take issue with his statement and on the surface it does look bad. But context! This meeting was specifically for young married couples, it was about how to keep your marriage strong. The question was about how to handle a spouse that was falling away due to issues with church History. In that context I agree out researching your spouse probably isn't the best way to keep your marriage strong.
Likewise with Paul, we don't know what the question was, or the circumstances surrounding the question were.

For example:
"I'm a 34-year-old man in the prime of my life. I have been called by the Holy Spirit and by God's anointed to serve as a traveling missionary, which I am engaged in trying to do. But I find myself drawn to the women I teach and serve, especially the unmarried Christian women. Without intending to, I catch myself idly thinking about being with them in intimate situations, not merely lustfully, but in the context of marriage and family. Brother Paul, I know that this season of my life is to be dedicated to the service of the Master as a missionary, just as you and Timothy are doing. But my mind keeps straying to marriage and family and intimate matters between husband and wife. I'm distracted all the time. I don't know what to do. As a widower, you are a man experienced in marital matters. What is your counsel?"

I think the biggest problem with today's cultural patterns is that our collective "best-interest-o-meters" are badly malfunctioning and we're at a point where people equate one's best interest with their desires and feelings, to the point where people's entire identity is defined by what they want and how they feel instead of what they contribute and what they do.  
People feel pity for guys like Ken because he isn't giving in to his physical desires instead of admiring him for having the level of self control and wisdom to make his choices by his faith.  I WISH my faith were as strong as his.

You know, I remember a time when one of the pro-Second Amendment arguments was "Once they've taken all the guns, they'll come for knives next." and the other side laughed and laughed and said that was just a conspiracy theory, take off the tinfoil hats, etc...
And then you see this stuff.  But I ain't laughing.

Obligatory MollyAnn Wymer link:
 

Oh my goodness, it's not the Babylon Bee.
And now it's time to make fun of our friends across the pond.
EU today:

Meanwhile, in the USA:

https://www.lds.org/study/manual/handbook-2-administering-the-church/selected-church-policies-and-guidelines/selected-church-policies?lang=eng#title_number71
Especially:
Handbook 2 answers a multitude of questions.

Helping the financial clerk do tithing.

On the flip side I think companies are becoming aware of this. I felt the latest Android had some fairly sane notification blocking features, it even notices that I swipe away certain notifications and asks if I'd like them blocked ( reality was that I got enough info from the notification to swipe it away without going into the application for more info)
I say slap that do not disturb mode on and enjoy the silence!
 
Side note: I'd love to get a machine going that loads software off of 5.25" floppies. I have fond memories of playing this pirates game on big floppies on a DOS computer. Not that I'm old enough to really remember 5.25" floppies, my friend just happened to find some at a pawn shop and the bays were still around so we played it.
I've thought about building a free DOS rig for ancient gaming... But retcon games are a thing now and they tend to really pretty the game up while keeping the pixelated art styles.

I actually attended this meeting, it was in my stake. The article explained the context pretty well. I'd emphasise that this was a Q&A meeting for young married couples, where a specific question was asked in regards to keeping marriages together. It was a great meeting, I enjoyed it.

This. The world, particularly atheists have dumbed down faith to mean, "Having no good reason to believe, but you believe it anyway." What I am surprised though is how active LDS and Christians have promulgated this false definition of faith also.
Atheist, generally speaking, have made "faith" look like a really bad term that only ignorant, unstudied, unintelligent, irrational, and illogical people have. This to me is one of Satan's greatest successes. I won't tell people not to have faith, but I will change the definition such that people will think its dumb to have faith.
When I read the quote from Elder Oaks, it was spot on. I found early on in my mission that researching all of the affects of items in the Word of Wisdom didn't help anyone change their behavior. What I did discover is that teaching principles of faith with the Word of Wisdom had more of an affect on the mind then teaching them all the bad that could happen because they drink, smoke, etc...
 

I actually attended this meeting, it was in my stake. The article explained the context pretty well. I'd emphasise that this was a Q&A meeting for young married couples, where a specific question was asked in regards to keeping marriages together. It was a great meeting, I enjoyed it.

I actually attended this meeting, it was in my stake. The article explained the context pretty well. I'd emphasise that this was a Q&A meeting for young married couples, where a specific question was asked in regards to keeping marriages together. It was a great meeting, I enjoyed it.