Anddenex

I thought my devil emoticon at the end would signify I was being sarcastic. MT Dew will keep you up.

I think that was the joke. Notice the little devil.

Searching for a stray comment you know you have heard before can be so frustrating sometimes. Finally, through an old topic here at lds.net, I found this talk by Elder Nelson (https://www.lds.org/ensign/2004/08/worshiping-at-sacrament-meeting?lang=eng&_r=1 ) where he states that children may partake of the sacrament as preparation for the covenants they will make (see the section titled Conducting Sacrament Meeting). I knew I remembered Elder Nelson addressing this, but could not find where. I don't know if there is a more thorough doctrinal exposition on this elsewhere, but I seem to recall a few passing statements like this that make this practice about preparing children for their future covenants.

I think it was some of both.  I do suspect that the Nephites tried to observe the Mosaic proscriptions about intermarrying with foreign peoples; whereas the Lamanites probably tended not to be so picky about their choice in partners.  This would have resulted, over time, in the Lamanites adopting physical characteristics of the indegenous cultures and leave them physically somewhat distinct from the Nephites; it would also explain why the Lamanites seemed to enjoy a numeric advantage over the Nephites for most of the period before Christ's coming; and it would partially explain why the Nephite merger with the (ostensibly, but not provably, Israelite-descended) Mulekites was such an earth-shaking development in Nephite culture that shortly thereafter, a group of "pure descendants of Nephi" (Zeniff) would withdraw from Nephite society entirely.  

Shunned, no all are welcomed into the Church regardless of whether they do or don't have kids, married or unmarried.  There isn't a whole lot that is requisite to be a member of the Church, faith in God & Jesus Christ, testimony of the Book of Mormon & Joseph Smith, and a commitment to keep the basic worthiness - i.e. believe in the Law of Chastity, Word of Wisdom etc.
So while I say you won't be shunned, you will find an extreme/heavy influence on families and the proper roles of men/women-father/mother. The weight of the influence will depend a lot on the composition of the ward you in.  If you are part of a younger ward, with lots of young families you will have more emphasis on children, and raising them properly. If you are in an older ward-not so much.
Having said that, I personally find it very disheartening and sad to see so many people who don't want to have kids. You never know what you missing until it is completely taken away from you. Quite frankly, modern society is extremely sick and so many people are influenced by modern society to believe in not having kids. I have several kids, who I love very dearly, and it is very easy to say well I don't want any more kids or we shouldn't have kids right now . . . until that choice is ripped away in an instant and it is no longer a choice. 
It is quite sad what has happened to the culture in the US, the actual re-population rate in the US right now is below replacement rate . .. i.e. as a culture and people we are in a very real sense killing off our own culture and heritage---it is 1.97 and you need 2.1 just to maintain a stable population. So the people who are actually well adjusted, have good jobs who could support raising (and raising in a proper manner) more children don't. The people who are not well adjusted, i.e. they are on welfare, are not stable, don't have stable families etc. have 4,5,6 kids. Well where does that lead when I get old . . .you get a larger and larger percentage of the population who has not been trained right b/c their parents didn't teach them properly.
Raising a righteous generation of children is an act of love, it's an act of love for one's own neighbor . . .b/c when I'm 70+ I'm going to have to rely on the younger generation to help out and if there are more entitled brats running around rather than humble, God-fearing men/women I and a whole lot of other people are going to be in a world of hurt.
People have the freedom to make their own choices in life, but having lived and experienced my fair share of this world, I can say with absolute confidence that raising children to be adults is the best way to have the maximum amount of happiness and joy in this life (it is also the best way to have the maximum amount of pain too!). It is an individual choice, but once we are married-it is God's first commandment to us. 
The Gospel is about families, it is about having families, about raising them properly, about serving them, teaching them, etc.  I can say in my 30s that my single biggest regret in my life is and will be forever that I didn't have more kids.
So will people shun you, absolutely not. Is it possible that you feel shunned (and there is a big difference between the two)? Yes it is possible. Similar to a couple that cannot have children might feel shunned, guilt, displeasure, pain, sorrow, etc. when the Relief Society lesson turns to a topic about children and stories are brought up about kids.  Or you might feel shunned when 95% of the women your age in Church are running around scrambling after their kids, or taking the screaming baby out of sacrament, going to the mothers room, etc. Or when the women your age organize a kids get-together day and the kids run around at the park while they talk.
But no one will actively shun you, if they do they have some things in their own life to fix.  A lot of whether or not you feel shunned will depend on the reasons you come to Church, if you come to church 1st to commune with God and to be nurtured by His good word through others then you shouldn't have a problem.

There isn't anything further I will be able to share with you, other than what has been shared. They are one eternal God, three distinct persons, but I will refer you to Skalenfehl's answer above mine.

From your perspective, nothing as you believe in the trinity. Amulek is referring to the Godhead, one eternal God (not existing parts), three distinct persons. In this case, you are attributing your personal belief to Amulek, not what Amulek actually believed.

Amulek indeed wasn't. They are one Eternal God; although, not the trinity which is being implied.

There isn't anything further I will be able to share with you, other than what has been shared. They are one eternal God, three distinct persons, but I will refer you to Skalenfehl's answer above mine.

From your perspective, nothing as you believe in the trinity. Amulek is referring to the Godhead, one eternal God (not existing parts), three distinct persons. In this case, you are attributing your personal belief to Amulek, not what Amulek actually believed.

Amulek indeed wasn't. They are one Eternal God; although, not the trinity which is being implied.

Is there a way to preview our posts before submitting? These forums have changed yet again. Please bear with me...
 
While Jesus Christ is both a Father and Son, He also has a Father. Therefore, both Fathers will come to you and make Their abode with you. But because Jesus took upon Himself flesh, He became a Son. Anyway, they are two distinct people. Just like I have a dad and a grandpa and both are fathers. 
So you see, when Jehovah and Elohim (as we in the church call His Father) visit you, you will see that they are two different people just as Joseph Smith saw in his first vision. They had both also visited Nephi, which we get a glimpse:
So when Jesus Christ visited the people at Bountiful, they understood, just as the bro of Jared understood, who they were praying to. They had faith no longer, for they knew nothing doubting. 
 

From your perspective, nothing as you believe in the trinity. Amulek is referring to the Godhead, one eternal God (not existing parts), three distinct persons. In this case, you are attributing your personal belief to Amulek, not what Amulek actually believed.

No. That is a Catholic precept. I am, however, clarifying what Joseph Smith already knew and taught, which we read about in Lectures on Faith. But Abinadi also knew this. In his explanation of Isaiah to King Noah and his priests, Abinadi also expounds on Jesus Christ's role as a Father and a Son. Furthermore, in the book of Ether, when Jesus Christ brings the bro of Jared back into His presence, He explains to the bro of Jared that all who come unto Christ become His sons and daughters. At Bountiful, when Jesus Christ unfolded all the mysteries to the people from the foundation of the world until the end, they understood His role and knew Him as not only their Savior, but also their Father. Jesus Christ commands all who believe on Him to call upon His name:
 
 

My Three year old takes the Sacrament, before I joined the Church I did not get my Son Christened as I had decided I no longer believed in Infant baptism.  I want him to want to take the sacrament and to understand its meaning, no greater teacher then emulation in young children. 

Bingo . . .as a parent you pick your battles.  This is not one that I care to worry about or fight.

As @zil and @Sunday21 have shared, parents who are allowing children to partake of the sacrament are not doing so out of need. Infant baptism and children under the age of 8 partaking the sacrament are not similar. The purpose of baptism, if we baptize an infant, is to save their soul. A child partaking the sacrament isn't saving their soul. They are only eating and drinking water, nothing more. After they are baptized, then it becomes a saving ordinance in connection with their baptism. 
Now, if you feel strongly about this, then I would properly prepare any children you have, and honestly I wish you the best in trying to teach a 18 month old of why he/she can't eat a small piece of bread and drink a small cup of water (because that is all it is to them -- food). If a parent believes in this I have no qualms with it. This is their choice, and I would support the parent. 

As @zil and @Sunday21 have shared, parents who are allowing children to partake of the sacrament are not doing so out of need. Infant baptism and children under the age of 8 partaking the sacrament are not similar. The purpose of baptism, if we baptize an infant, is to save their soul. A child partaking the sacrament isn't saving their soul. They are only eating and drinking water, nothing more. After they are baptized, then it becomes a saving ordinance in connection with their baptism. 
Now, if you feel strongly about this, then I would properly prepare any children you have, and honestly I wish you the best in trying to teach a 18 month old of why he/she can't eat a small piece of bread and drink a small cup of water (because that is all it is to them -- food). If a parent believes in this I have no qualms with it. This is their choice, and I would support the parent. 

As @zil and @Sunday21 have shared, parents who are allowing children to partake of the sacrament are not doing so out of need. Infant baptism and children under the age of 8 partaking the sacrament are not similar. The purpose of baptism, if we baptize an infant, is to save their soul. A child partaking the sacrament isn't saving their soul. They are only eating and drinking water, nothing more. After they are baptized, then it becomes a saving ordinance in connection with their baptism. 
Now, if you feel strongly about this, then I would properly prepare any children you have, and honestly I wish you the best in trying to teach a 18 month old of why he/she can't eat a small piece of bread and drink a small cup of water (because that is all it is to them -- food). If a parent believes in this I have no qualms with it. This is their choice, and I would support the parent. 

Just a bit of a warning.  You will find 2 Nephi very difficult to get through as it pretty much just quotes Isaiah in the Bible.  But once you get past it, the rest really is fascinating.   Happy reading.  If you have any questions during your reading, don't hesitate to ask.

As @zil and @Sunday21 have shared, parents who are allowing children to partake of the sacrament are not doing so out of need. Infant baptism and children under the age of 8 partaking the sacrament are not similar. The purpose of baptism, if we baptize an infant, is to save their soul. A child partaking the sacrament isn't saving their soul. They are only eating and drinking water, nothing more. After they are baptized, then it becomes a saving ordinance in connection with their baptism. 
Now, if you feel strongly about this, then I would properly prepare any children you have, and honestly I wish you the best in trying to teach a 18 month old of why he/she can't eat a small piece of bread and drink a small cup of water (because that is all it is to them -- food). If a parent believes in this I have no qualms with it. This is their choice, and I would support the parent. 

I may have missed that line.... 

I may have missed that line.... 

As @zil and @Sunday21 have shared, parents who are allowing children to partake of the sacrament are not doing so out of need. Infant baptism and children under the age of 8 partaking the sacrament are not similar. The purpose of baptism, if we baptize an infant, is to save their soul. A child partaking the sacrament isn't saving their soul. They are only eating and drinking water, nothing more. After they are baptized, then it becomes a saving ordinance in connection with their baptism. 
Now, if you feel strongly about this, then I would properly prepare any children you have, and honestly I wish you the best in trying to teach a 18 month old of why he/she can't eat a small piece of bread and drink a small cup of water (because that is all it is to them -- food). If a parent believes in this I have no qualms with it. This is their choice, and I would support the parent. 

I may have missed that line....