rosie321

Racist remarks show the character whose speaking them. Its the responsibility of those who listen to it to not encourage it. Rush, Imus and others are on because they are being listened to and have large audiences. I'd rather see people freely choose, on their own not to listen to this stuff and turn it off. The ratings will speak and these guys will be gone. Democratically by the majority. Not the way this was seemingly done. If the leaders were wise they would have worked on educating people and being unprejudiced themselves. By not giving Imus a chance to return and have listeners reject him themself they've done more harm than good. They're trying to control people instead of educating people and letting them choose for themselves. I'm a person who likes to know who's against me and would rather their honesty then having people afraid to speak their mind while growing a seething animosity. Get things out on the table! Sure Imus might be off the air and its probably a good thing but what are all his listeners thinking now? What might they resort to now that they feel attacked and that he was unjustly removed?

In some ways I would have to say Limbaugh was not equally wrong but in some ways more wrong than Imus' remarks.The setting of Rush's show is different than Imus'. He is the Center of Excellence or whatever. He's supposed to be more serious. So I would expect more of him. Imus is a shock jock who has always fed off trash talk. Its no surprise he'd make a comment like what he made. I would not take Imus as serious as Rush and would be listening to them, if I was interested for different reasons.. What Rush said was just plain stupid. There's no excuse. But on the other hand Michael J Fox did come out strongly and made his disability a critical issue in that instance. Rush was addressing that. Michael J Fox made his disability a critical issue and shouldn't be surprised when someone makes a comment on it. In the long run it wound out helping Michael J Fox and the ones he was supporting because people reacted negatively to Rush's comments.

No, that's not it at all. Really, you should read about it. It's tax based on goods and services that we choose to spend our money on. No income is taxed. To me, it seems like a no-brainer. Flat sales tax would be good so everyone pays and is aware what they are paying. Right now the average person pays so many different taxes, liscences and fees on everything. People would be shocked if they knew how much they were paying! The downfall would be all the accountants out of business, the government not being able to keep tabs as easily on what you're earning and doing or being able to sell your information. If its a federal sales tax how do you think your state taxes would be handled? Would the states have a hard time getting money from the federal government? Will the government be content having a flat sales tax, being the only income they recieve, and not coming up with other sneaky ways of getting their money? The flat sales tax will probably only be on top of many others. Poor Sixpactr living in one of the countries tax capitals!

I also feel those words serve no good purpose and should not be used either. To me it reveals a lot about the character using it. I could never see what good anyone could find in such trash talk. I feel being fired as he was from this incident was extreme with out another chance or clarification as to what was appropriate standards for his shock job. I have to ask where is the reproach against all the other people who use these words daily and for whom it is considered a cultural norm? Why has that been accepted as alright up until Imus' comments? Why has nothing been done before now to stop the usage of those words? Thats what angers me. The fact that its being done for personal gain and other political agenda then that people are genuinely upset by what he said. Others who did nothing about this problem before should not stand up and profit from it now or use it to make themselves look good. It seems like the most outspoken people now on this issue, who are using this situation for their own gain bear some responsibility in the matter and should not be viewed as pioneers of change now. I don't think they should be able to dictate morality to the rest of us or try and control what is alright to say and not. They have demonstrated no responsibility up until now. The words were said on a trash talk show by a shock jock who was saying it. This should be taken into account. People understand he is outrageous and most likely would have forgotton it in a couple of days so in the longterm would have probably not really impacted the girls. While highly inappropriate and uncalled for he was using Hip hop words that others use all the time. He's a shock jock! Why should he be completely destroyed without some warning beforehand? He was doing what people expected him to do. Say outrageous stuff based on culture that his listeners would find funny. Comedians sometimes say some pretty outrageous things (though without the heavy language usually) What might have been forgotton will probably never be forgotten in the listeners minds now. While they might have been swayed to positive change do you really think they will now? They will just feel like their favorite shock jock got unrighteously booted. The team will forever be known by that horrible name to the listeners. Those who remained silent as this culture grew and did not speak out should bear accountability too in my opinion. What was said to these women was inappropriate and wrong. But they can survive this "traumatic" experience and they could have turned it out for the good. So far their actions do not seem to be doing this. Hopefully they still will. I've had some horrible things said and done to me that effected me worse personally then these woman got from Imus and have survived. It hurt and cost a lot. But I learned some important lessons. There are people who will always be against. Some may very well try and hurt you and not just by some stupid idiotic remarks. Thank goodness for the church leadership who though really appalled by the things done encouraged positive ways of dealing with it and the offenders to ensure the best outcome. Though the offenders couldn't take back the damages they created and there weren't personal apologies given. I saw attitudes change some and the offenders were able to see a little that what they were doing was wrong. There is no doubt the evil in their heart when they did their actions. But it was good to see a positive change in their heart however much. If this had been handled differently it might have done more good overall. Instead it just inflames contentions and divisions. They made a huge issue out of something that had not been presented as evil before but as an acceptable norm in certain circles. Therefore I don't think that it demands the extreme punishment that was given and the destruction of a mans life who is doing nothing differently than he has done for the last 3 decades Btw prayers to the NJ governer and his family. Just noticed all the responses. Appreciate your expressed views on this matter

Good points Almom The field is ripe unto harvest but the laborers are few. Thank God for the few laborers there are.

LT04 you said lots of great things. Speaking for myself, yes I probably did come on pretty strong. I didn't mean to knock Jia down as she was trying to recommit herself to go. I'm excited that she's making choices that will in the long run make her happier. She obviously wants to go and put things in order. She probably posted more for strength then for the what to do part. As I said before I have myself been inactive at periods. So maybe I'm acting like a reformed addict or something. I found that I had to go back myself not for anyone else. No one ever came to my house and said please come back or brought over stuff etc. I did not have my Ensign moment either even though I had tried my best to always give them to others. I had to get over that. But as stated in the last post I think it made me stronger. Her comments concerned me and I couldn't help but point out that the same thing maybe happening to her. I did not want her to feel that her lack of Ensign moment may have nothing to do with her. She just needed to do what was right. I did not want Satan to use that against her and to make it clear that she can do it on her own and she may even be stronger for it. She will also be a strong force in being able to help out others along the way and give them their Ensign moments. But she can't do it if she's not there and not acquainted with their needs..

****Warning **** I'd like to discuss, vent and hear others thoughts on a matter. This topic may rile a few feathers and I may unknowingly say things or use terminology that might offend some. I have some strong feelings regarding this and so may come across a little hard at moments. I'd like to discuss and vent on the topic about Imus's comments and firings. There are some good discussable related issues here I think. I will not repeat what he said because I do not think it was an appropriate thing to say. Nor do I think it needs to be repeated in any follow up posts. If you haven't heard what was said its probably the better for you. I personally have never liked to listen to his shocking stuff which to me was valueless drivel, played in the background at previous employments. That having been said I must say I am appalled, although not in the least surprised by the fallout and what has happened. As before I think what Imus said was inappropriate and uncalled for. But then again I question where did he learn the terms from? Who else uses them? Why is he singled out? Is it just because he is a white man saying it? Many of the black leaders out there are worse to me than the pharisees and saducees. Waiting on whom they can prey upon. They stand waiting for someone to do something wrong for their profit. What are they doing to stop the promotion of the filth as they call it within their own ranks and communities? How have they really helped the people they serve? They want this man fired but what are they doing to stop the black artists who are still profiting off of worse trash? I have heard nothing of them going after the black artists or the stations who support black artists that use such language. In fact many times its just accepted as a cultural thing. Why, probably because there is no profit from stopping it within their own ranks. But the word discrimination has a high price tag so they relentlessly pursue anything they can tag with that name. If it is now agreed upon that this language is inappropriate, then it should not be tolerated within their own culture. It shouldn't have been tolerated at all as a cultural expression by true leaders. It is unacceptable that such expression has been allowed to become so popular. They need to remove the mote out of their own eye first as scriptures indicate. I'd think they'd be ashamed to go on the attack until they've addressed the problems in their own community. I feel bad for my wonderful and decent friends who are represented by such poor examples of leadership. It hurts them and diminishes their goodness. Its too bad there aren't more outspoken black leaders like Bill Cosby and others who have done much to try and better the lives of others. There is an outstanding article that was sent to me. Its from Newsday http://www.newsday.com -Its More Than Just Imus by Shaun Powell, a black columnist. I think he articulates these thoughts quite well. I'm glad he had the courage to stand up also and say what needs to be said. If this article is indicative of his daily moral standing he gets my kudos and full support. The Rutgers team fell down on the opportunity they had to show their true character, in my opinion. They could have better used this opportunity to really lead the way. I really question their motives behind their actions (makes me think of the daughter of Herod who asked for John the Baptists head). What Imus said was uncalled for but it did not have to be drawn out into this three ring circus. Imus is a shock jock who has for many years made deplorable comments. For reasons uncomprehensible to me that is why people listen to him. They enjoy hearing the outrageous. While he did use words against them I really doubt he meant anything personal by it as they allude. Much like the late night comedians jokes about people mean. So I don't totally understand why they came off so harshly against him and tried to resolve it so agressively in public ways. They might have been handling it the same way the church handles anti's walk away or taking a meeting privately aside first? Could they not have worked with Imus and maybe even turned him as their advocate? Instead all I can envision coming from this situation is greater racial divide and hostilities. While his words were offensive I'm not sure to what degree he really damaged them. I'd think more damage has come to them since their aggressive public fight and their usage in the agenda of others. Now everyone knows the filth language that was used By Imus. The words are now on the tips of many peoples tongues who never even heard of those words, listened to Imus' program or would have even thought anything bad about those women. Now they will be forever pictured by those words. If this was handled differently the damage might have been more limited and with more good coming out of it. Hopefully their actions were just all made in the immediacy of events and they will demonstrate true character and leadership skills in the future to help within their own community and show consistancy in their views. This matter concerns me also because of the freedom of speech and the politcal correct movement. If this is supposed to ease racial tensions, I cannot see how it can with such hippocritical standards. If you are from one culture or race you can say whatever but if someone else says it is wrong and dooms you to personal destruction? Say the LDS were to make fun of our prophets and disregard the words of scriptures how can not expect others to do the same who have no clue about the value of the church, what it is about or what they are doing? People chose to keep Imus where he was at over the years. His behaviour was accepted. He would not have been kept on so long without a big listening audience. His comment was bad but then his audience would have probably reigned him in especially after a suspension to avoid the threat of permanent removal. Its too bad in two weeks he couldn't have been given the chance to go back on and to maybe turn things around or let the audience kick him out. With all the media hoopla it will not be easily forgotton that he made a big mistake. He might do more good back at the job. Let the fans either pull him out or keep him in. I worry about the political correct machine putting pressure on the stations and sponsors to fire him. Give his audience a chance to speak. I also worry about the politicians involvement in trying to monitor and control the freedom of speech and what is listened to. Are we really free if we cannot choose? Let the people speak! Not just the few afraid of being destroyed by the politically correct machines. If what Imus said is now accepted as wrong by the majority and not allowable on air, then our stations need to hear about it and all artists that use any similar language in any of their works, regardless of background should be removed immediately. It should also be made clear what can and can't be said so there is no misunderstanding as to what is appropriate and not. Its sickening in some cases the way harassment and discrimination laws are written that someone can take the words of someone in ways that they never intended and destroy someone for it. Just had to get that off my chest...

Thanks Crimson. I think you are correct in that the 12 probably doesn't involve the 12 tribes because of its reference to the other worlds. If it were referrring to our own world only it might work. Like when Christ appeared to His other sheep. Its difficult to imagine him spreading Abraham/ Israels seed over many planets. Being as specific as it was on the number 12 gets me thinking. Just another one of those mysteries yet to be revealed I suppose:)

Let's establish context to determine what the "kingdoms" are that the parable in verses 51-61 talks about. D&C 88 v. 36 "All kingdoms have a law given;" vv. 42-43 "And again, verily I say unto you, he hath given a law unto all things, by which they move in their times and their seasons;" "And their courses are fixed, even the courses of the heavens and the earth, which comprehend the earth and all the planets." vv. 45-47 "The earth rolls upon her wings, and the sun giveth his light by day, and the moon giveth her light by night, and the stars also give their light, as they roll upon their wings in their glory, in the midst of the power of God." "Unto what shall I liken these kingdoms, that ye may understand?" "Behold, all these are kingdoms, and any man who hath seen any or the least of these hath seen God moving in his majesty and power." v.51 "Behold, I will liken these kingdoms unto a man having a field, and he sent forth his servants into the field to dig in the field." Verse 36 says all kingdoms have a law given. Verses 42-43 say that all things have a law given to them, and defines "all things" as the heavens and the earth which include "all the planets." Syllogism time: 1. All kingdoms have a law given to them; 2. The heavens and the planets have laws given to them; therefore... 3. The heavens and planets are considered "kingdoms." Verses 45-47 establish beyond dispute the fact that the heavens and planets are "kingdoms." How? Verse 45 lists the earth, the sun, the moon and the stars. Then verse 46 asks what to liken "these kingdoms" to. Then verse 47 seals the deal by saying that "all these are kingdoms." Finally, verse 51 answers the question posed in verse 46. The Lord likens "these kingdoms" (which include the heavens and planets) to a field with twelve servants sent out to dig (v. 51). Verses 52-57 explain that the lord of the field told each servant he would visit the first servant for one hour, and then move on to visit the next servant for an hour, until he had visited all twelve servants. v. 58: "And thus they all received the light of the countenance of their lord, every man in his hour, and in his time, and in his season—" What do the twelve men in the parable represent? Verse 61 is almost an exact copy of verse 58 except in place of the word "man" it says "kingdom," as here: v. 61: "Therefore, unto this parable I will liken all these kingdoms, and the inhabitants thereof—every kingdom in its hour, and in its time, and in its season, even according to the decree which God hath made." This verse teaches several significant things. First, it mentions that "these kingdoms" have inhabitants. This would suggest that among the "kingdoms" which are the heavens and the planets, there are planets with their own inhabitants, distinct from our planet and its inhabitants. Second, it says that the Lord will visit each of these "kingdoms" separately for a specific period of time, just like the lord of the field in the parable visited each servant separately for one hour. Conclusion? I believe that just as Jesus visited the Nephites after his resurrection, he will personally visit all other "kingdoms" and their inhabitants, according to the pattern in the parable. Gives new meaning to, "And other sheep I have which are not of this fold, and them also I must visit..." the_jason: You said: "Heavenly Father said he created this world in the same manner as other worlds prior. If those worlds were just like this world then they would have had to have a Savior just as we did. I'm sure it was not the same as our Savior. They would have had their own." I disagree. I think the symbolism in the parable I just discussed includes the following: The field = God's kingdom as a whole, His "stewardship" if you will; Twelve servants = The various "kingdoms" or planets (whether twelve or twelve million) with their inhabitants. I believe Heavenly Father administers salvation to His spiritual progeny alone. Since the inhabitants of the other planets or "kingdoms" are within God's "field" or stewardship, it follows that those inhabitants are among His spirit children. As such, these other inhabitants--as God's children--would still be covered by Christ's atonement. God didn't gather everyone together premortally and say, "Okay, for planet x I propose Jesus serve as its Savior. Planet y...hmmm...it should have a different savior...any recommendations?" Jesus is the Savior of all of God's spiritual children, past, present and yet to be born. There is no need for a different savior for each "kingdom" or planet. Christ's atonement is infinite and eternal, encompassing the heavens and the planets with all their inhabitants. To God alone the glory! Crimson I liked your points, could follow them, and found myself agreeing for the most part with your interpretation of it. But the unto 12 is the only thing that is throwing me for a loop. I know this is just a parable but I can't help but wonder if that 12 means something more. It is very specific in its unto the 12 as though that number has some significance. Why 12? When scriptures specifically mention numbers like that it usually has some significance-12 tribes of Isreal, 12 apostles, the 70, 3 days in the belly of the whale, Christ dead for 3 days......................... From my interpretations of POGP especially there are many many worlds beyond our own. Far more than 12. So I couldn't help but consider the possibility of it being associated with the 12 tribes. Any more thoughts as to the importance of the 12?

Not sure how comment without possibly coming off in a wrong way here when going off into unchartered territory. It seems very strange to me the concept that Heavenly Father would keep repeating the same process and that there would be so many different Christs for His numerous creations. The creation of other worlds could have occured as ours but was all the followed the same? Why did each planet have to have their own Christs? Why couldn't Gods only begotton be the one and only final sacrifice or are there a whole group of Christs that stepped forward in the premortal existance?. Were people from other planets at the origional council or were there different premortal councils for each planet? Above was the comment about the atonement and focusing on the basics of the gospel. These questions could defineately impact the way that one were to view it.

Fun game.

I've heard people saying things like that before. Not sure if just opinion or fact though

Again, consult D&C 88:51-61 for a parable applicable to your question. Christ was born once, lived as a mortal once, died for the sins of all of God's children once (regardless of what planet they live on), and was resurrected once. He is not forever being born to a virgin on every planet under God's dominion. D&C 88 vs 57 Isn't this parable referring to our earth only? He will go to each kingdom and its inhabitants unto the 12th? We know he appeared in Jeruselem and to his "other sheep" the Nephites so the concept of him going to visit various people is not unreasonable. Is the the verse unto the 12th referring to the 12 tribes of Israel? Or are there parts of the tribes scattered over the various planets?

There is nothing more sacred then Christs atonement and salvation. Is it really demeaning to want to inquire of the unknown or to speak of it? Isn't that how Joseph Smith found out much of his knowledge , by asking? To personally find out things aren't we told to ask? That is how truth is revealed to us-by asking and seeking Sure maybe we are not ready for the answers but I'm sure we will come to know that. Should we make seeking after the unknown our primary goal. NO. There are plenty of other things to keep us busy. No one is stating here that we have all the answers on this matter and have made clear our ignorant curiosity on the matter. We are not handing out doctrine. We are taught that there are many things yet to be revealed. That there are records for each of the twelve tribes. Why wouldn't there be such for other planets? Weren't we introduced to the concept of other worlds through scriptures themselves? Most noteably the Pearl of Great Price? Many prophets in the Bible were drawn to astronomy and shown many things. The average member has access to these things nowdays. Why would it be considered wrong to seek furthur in this area when God himself introduced these concepts to us? Is it wrong to discuss possibilities shown to prophets throughout time? To prepare our hearts and minds for what is to come? One constant thing throughout church history is for people to be unable to handle "new" truths. Despite introduced truths from God. In OT times is was hard to comprehend Christ coming to the earth. When Christ was on earth most people did not recognize him for who he was. After Christs death there were those who could not handle his resurrection, having other sheep, and that he did not take his place as ruler. In these modern days there are many that cannot grasp the need for a restoration and an organization. With the restoration came gifts like the Pearl of Great Price to introduce us to more possiblities and the next step to come. Those who really considered scriptures, what was introduced to them by prophets, and other things given to them were probably not surprised by the "new" things they saw. They were prepared for that new thing and ready for its revealing. It was not this strange and foreign thing. We have been told there are other worlds. Why is it wrong to want to understand more if it is kept in check and to prepare ourselves for what is yet to come

Wouldn't the idea of Christ having to go through this again and again take away from the power of Christs life and sacrifice? The atonement would start to lose its value after awhile. I mean if Christ keeps coming to a planet, recieving mortal form, and resurrecting over and over again it would start losing its meaning. Plus how many bodies would it be that Christ have to get in that scenario. Once is enough. Agree. Many people never lived at the time of Christ and yet look how many people know of Him and have devoted their life to His service. God could defineately communicate the news of christs sacrifice on our planet to HIs other creations

Good questions LT. But boy does my head hurt now . Brain cells are going pop pop :) I have to say that some of these questions have come to mind before but the popping brain cells have stopped me from going to far. I have to save all the ones I have left I'd hate to think that Jesus would have to go through the same thing on each planet and that God would have Him go through the same thing on the infinite number of planets created. I would hope one time would suffice as an example to all. That God could use it. I have heard things, don't know of their validity and can't remember where it was heard, but that earth was one of the lesser planets. (even fits in with concepts on SG-1 :) ) Maybe Christ was sent here to be crucified here on this planet because the sinful state of this world. The people of Earth could actually kill him and perform that deed. Our technologies and knowledge may be different than other planets too. Maybe they are at a different or advanced level and would not have killed Christ and would respond to different teaching methods. They might not need to have Christ crucified on their planet to recognize His significance and be willing to follow. That being considered maybe he wouldn't have to die on every planet. Maybe earth is the battle ground of Satan and Christ. Much like right now the middle east is the battleground of terrorism? Plus if you believe there would be only one Satan , why not only one Christ? These are of course just thoughts and ideas. No church doctrine here.

In my opinion from what you've said... 1. Make your relationship with the God and His gospel a #1 priority-which it appears you are doing to the best of your abilities. Do what is right and what you learn to be true. 2. Follow through with your plan of developing friendships. Thats a first place to start. Everyone needs friends to balance you out. You'll learn many valuable things and have honest connections to help guide you through life and decisions. You will learn many wonderful things such as how to handle deeper relationships. Sometimes they can be useful in helping you identify and choose a mate that would be best for you. 3. I think your last focus should be on obtaining a mate right now. If you are led that way then fine A good marriage is a deep friendship/ love bound forever. Therefore I'd put my focus on developing good, clean friendship connections first. A marriage is one of the biggest commitments you'll ever make-2nd to the gospel. You are creating a three way partnership. God -you-your mate. Be very careful who you pick. Don't rush into it. I think too many people do and regret it later. Make sure its done with the help of God. A marriage will not take away existing problems. It magnifies them. Its important to learn the tools to handle them. Right now considering all the issues you've been dealing with and your recent conversion I wouldn't make finding a mate my primary focus. You've got enough to deal with. Haste makes waste as the saying goes. If this woman is meant to be she will be there when you are truly ready. You may want to be there for her and keep your commitment. But can you really be there when you are just finding yourself? I think right now you should figure out if that was a commitment that should have been made in the first place. Also if its a commitment that conflicts with the Will of God for your life. Plus I'm not sure she held up her part right from the start (knowingly or not). You need to work out other things in your life before rushing into such a deep commitment. If this is a commitment that should be upheld and you are following the gospel you will be led back to fulfill it. Just to add another thought- Also if the woman you commited to is of any value she should understand your waiting and working things out. she should be happy that you are trying to get your life in order so you can really be there and truly give yourself to her.

Those stories really do create a warm and fuzzy LDS picture. But I find myself concerned about the people who need someone to constantly be bringing them back or only go back when someone reaches out. Consider yourself blessed by the Lord because he is giving you your own spirit led, personal tutorial. The other members are getting it from someone else. You have come to the conclusion you needed to go back without all the public pomp and circumstance. They are getting theirs now. Your pomp and circumstance may come in the last day when you are found faithful by the Lord and are rewarded by Him for your diligence and obedience. As before maybe God is placing this concern in your heart so that you might help His other lost sheep who may not return any other way. He has plans for you sister:)

Hope you are feeling better too and will be going back.I realize it is really hard to think about going back to church after being inactive. I've had my own moments in the past some justifiable (work) and others not so justified. I guess thats why I came across so strongly in my post. I've felt the same ways you have about not going back and where to begin at moments. But the longer away the harder it is to go back and the more excuses that arise why to hold off. Its especially hard moving to a new area and trying to break in to a new ward. People never found me to give me the personal invite back but in my heart I felt that it was where I should be. I could go back or not. But there was something there. I came back to the truth of it for me. I was reminded of the sacrifice of our savior and realized is it too much to go to church? This request seems miniscule in comparison to what he did. That is what has helped my wayward heart. Also as in the other post there are probably others out there too that could use your help. Who feel the same way. You might be used as an instrument in Gods hands to help recognize the needs and help address them. Though ultimately it is in each individuals hands as to what they will do.

Liked your comments Almom. How true. If you wait for someone to come over you might be waiting for a long time. Who knows the person called to come get you to come maybe waiting for someone to get them. Or maybe theres someone you need to be inviting thats waiting for the person to come get them:hmmm: Wouldn't it be better for you to just go to church? YOu know you really want to.... A couple of things come to mind. D&C 58 25 Wherefore, let them bring their families to this land, as they shall acounsel between themselves and me. 26 For behold, it is not meet that I should command in all things; for he that is acompelled in all things, the same is slothful and not a wise servant; wherefore he receiveth no reward. 27 Verily I say, men should be aanxiously engaged in a good cause, and do many things of their own free will, and bring to pass much righteousness; 28 For the power is in them, wherein they are agents unto themselves. And inasmuch as men do good they shall in nowise lose their reward. 29 But he that doeth not anything until he is commanded, and receiveth a commandment with doubtful heart, and keepeth it with slothfulness, the same is damned. Numbers of chapters in the D&C also talk about the fields being ripe unto harvest but the Laborers are few. The church could use your help now. Not only when someone comes to see you. I hope that you get back to church for YOU. Because you are doing what you feel you are led to do. Because you believe you are doing what's right. Some things just need to be done. Even if its all by yourself. I think of Christ in the Garden of Gethsemane and in the moments before his death. His disciples all fell asleep on him and abandoned him but christ still did what he knew he should do. YOu know what you should be doing! Your husband needs to do the same as he is able for himself also. Because it is what he is called to do. Consider this your personal invite :) Sorry can't be there in person But will be praying for you.

Coleman, What help and advice are you looking for from us on this matter? We don't know all the detail of your situation and are limited as to our help. I think the major points have been made already. 1. Stay away from her or in the very least act at all times within proper moral boundaries in keeping with your new commitments. 2. When the proper time comes if you choose to resume your relationship then do so 3. What has happened previously does not matter now. You can change and be different. You can be forgiven. Repent of what you might have done. Getting baptized, if done sincerely, is a huge step in that area. 4. Repentance is possible for both of you. 5. The best source for what to do is prayer, scriptures , and other good readings (ie writings of the prophets, Ensign etc). Let the spirit lead you. 6. We can only give our opinions. 7. We cannot make your difficulties go away or choose your next step for you. 8. This woman and her husband as it appears have made some poor choices. How much do you want to get wrapped up into the aftermath? 9. What kind of future can you honestly have with her. 10. Work within the Lords time and will. If its meant to be it will be. YOu will know and have a surety. Right now God may be wanting to work in your life. I'm not certain what else there is to add to that without becoming utterly annoying or repetitive. I think those are the basic points made that YOU need to heavily weigh. We cannot make your decision for you. May you make wise ones is my prayer for you. Hi Rosie I appreciate all your input in this. You have made good points about her commitment to the Gospel. I have been having doubts about what type of person she is. She preaches all the right standards and is well versed in the church's teachings but as you said, does she really live them herself? You asked again "Where is she staying now?" Sorry I thought I made this clear, she moved out of my house when she returned to the church. I was baptised into the church about three months later. What she told me when she returned to the church was: "We can still be together/ date as long as we live like 2 young adults would before they get married" ....i'm just paraphrasing here. I have to also clarify her current marriage situation: She does not have a temple marriage. She has never been to the temple. Her husband/ex is temple endowed but he is inactive and living in sin with another church member. She said she never loved him and they will never get back together again. I have been having all these thoughts that you have mentioned Rosie. It's great to hear someone else's perspective on it. I have been really worried about our past history. Although I have also been thinking about what Ben said about repentance being grand and the blessings we get from it. Thank you Rosie and Ben, keep giving me your thoughts. Hi Jason. I agree with everything you said apart from one thing. Reading scriptures and praying to the Lord is the best way to get the answered I need. I have struggled to be humble enough at times to do so though. The only thing I disagree with is that people's advice and opinions here are crucifying me. :) Keep them coming, I need all the help I can get. Thanks Jason and everyone else too.

the_jason- My comments were not to crucify him. Whats done in the past is done. I'm happy that he has found the gospel and is making sincere strides to follow. It will only bless his life. The concern for me, he did ask for opinions, is for any future dealing with this woman. It is true that he has been given the spirit to guide him but needs to be wary of the advesary too. He needs to do all that he can do to stay close to God and push away those things that might pull him away. I can't help but think this woman may pull him away. As always I have to ask questions that don't necessarily have to be answered on this board but to oneself and with the Lord. These are kind of personal. Didn't she find love with her HUSBAND too at one time? Will she go back to him? What was her reason for leaving? Might she ever return to him? Was she honest about why she left? What do the husbands family and friends think about his relationship with her? (coleman does represent the gospel now and should be a light)What was Colemans and her love based in origionally? Honestly. Its great that Coleman has made the steps which is the basis for my concern. Why put his life on hold, get dragged into their messed up marriage situation. Right now he has the chance at a fresh start. To not be known as the "other man." He has begun the repentance process. Why wait for this woman to get her head straightened out? Maybe they do have a deep love that can handle anything. Yes love does sometimes win out but its not always the fairytale ending that some would like to make it out to be either. This is where my concern lies. He's going to have quite a challenging future if he seeks to stay with this woman. When asked an opinion on something and I see potential danger ahead I cannot be silent.

I have to disagree with a portion of your response Brother Dorsey.. In my opinion he should have as you said no more than a sisterly relationship. NO DATING. As long as she's married. I agree more with the posts above. Stay far from her. I cannot see it doing Coleman any good. The more I think about it the more I can't see any reason to stay with her except for allowing his natural man get the better of him. This woman does not honor the commitments she has made-how can you trust her to stay with him? She encouraged him to sin. How can that be love? Where is she staying now? If she starts living the gospel better maybe there's a possibility that her current temple marriage can be salvaged. I realize change and repentance are possibilities thanks to the gospel. On the other hand I can not see any good coming to Coleman by ever going back to her. He's better off building himself in the gospel and finding a strong woman that lives it. Going back to her given their history may only drag him away from the Lord rather than towards. Those are just my opinions of course. Jason, maybe i didn't write my first post very well. We met 2 years ago and I knew nothing about the church. I was not a member of any church( although I was brought up as a Catholic). We fell in love and got engaged quickly. At that time I didn't think there was anything wrong with that. I did ask but she said she was inactive in the church so it wouldn't affect her. I am glad that I became a member of the church and that my standards have changed so much now. Even if it means I can't be with the person I fell in love with. Coleman....You can be with the one you love....Just a little advice......if she really loves you and visa versa you and her will keep your emotions in check and keep your relationship with each other strictly friendly (as about as friendly as a brother and sister) NO DATING! until she is divorced and legally single...then you can pick up where you left off (except not live together and be chaste). Being a member of the church and still being married and dating is wrong....she, I am sure knows this and will be going through a repentance process.....you need to respect that.....the Lord loves her no matter what and will forgive her if she goes through the process...the first step is not dating until she is divorced...the second is asking for forgiveness....and possibly talking to her Bishop if she was married in the Temple and broke those covanents. It will take time and in the end, if the Lord has meant it to be, you and her can be together....think about it...wouldn't it be wonderful to be worthy to marry in the Lords Temple? It would be worth the wait. Be strong in your faith....support her in her process....trust me, it will be worth it! The Lord loves you and her more than you could ever know! Enjoy the journey

While origionally created for entertainment purposes only and with no LDS religious base to my knowledge, I have found that episodes I've seen of SG-1 have broadened my capacities to understand some of more complex concepts and the endless possiblitities beyond our world and to allow the mind to ponder some scientific possiblities. While it is obviously fiction only, some of the ideas it presents are really fascinating and spurs the mind to think of the world outside this own and how different worlds can be operating simutaneously. It puts the galaxies in a whole new light. You might find it fascinating too. I've only seen a portion of them. But it is most enjoyable.

Thanks Dr T. Brought tears to my eyes. Made my husband listen to it. Got to him too. He had to try and do that little head turn (not to see the tears starting) and he was pretty quieted for a minute. It touched him too. Nothing like telling the whole world at LDS talk B)