Anddenex

I'm not going to argue your statistic because it doesn't matter to my message.  One more time... applying racist methods to solving racial problems - like Affirmative Action - is not going to solve racism.
So, let's say... Blacks are more likely to be pulled over.  Okay.  Sure.  What's your solution?  Cops should stop pulling over blacks?  Cops should pull over more whites?  No.  That's a racist method to solving a racial problem.  Rather, the solution is - Why is that person getting pulled over?  Is the cop incompetent (you can be a blooming racist and still be competent at your job, by the way)?  ADDRESS JOB COMPETENCE.  Was there a traffic violation?  ADDRESS RESPECT FOR AUTHORITY.  None of which are racist methods.
Do you see?

Give me a statute - any statute, state or federal - that is racist.  I'll give you one - Affirmative Action.  That's racist.  So what we do - we fight to change that statute.  A judge ruling is not the Rule of Law.  If a ruling is racially biased, then it's a miscarriage of justice.  You fight for JUDICIAL COMPETENCE... not THE JUSTICE SYSTEM IS UNFAIR TO BLACKS.  It is not.  Just like Black People are Criminals.  They are not.  Mormons eat green jelo.  They don't.  It's a stereotype.  Fighting a stereotype by applying a stereotype LEADS YOU NOWHERE.
You see it differently because you insist on seeing in color and applying individual cases to generalizations.  I insist on breaking generalizations by seeing individuals.  A difference of opinion is not racism.  An opinion based on racial generalization is employing racist methods.  Filipino kitchens smell like vinegar - okay, racial generalization... but harmless, not necessarily racist.  Cops kill innocent black people - racial generalization, can be harmful as it promotes defiance of authority.  Muslims are terrorists - same thing, can be harmful, you understand that one, I'm sure.
A judgment based on a youtube video showing one tiny cross-section of the entire event due to a racial bias is just as UNJUST as a Judge or Jury coming down with the wrong verdict due to a racial bias.
 

Yes.  I will grant you the judgment-by-stereotype exists.  The more you adhere to the stereotype, the more the stereotype gets reinforced in society.  Therefore, people like Sterling who has a loooooonnng rap sheet and continues to have the attitude of no respect for authority will make it harder for people like Castille to break out of the stereotype.
The problem with the internet is that singular cases become talked about like it is endemic.. a perception fanned by the electioneering efforts of government riding on a narrative to pad their agenda and appeal to voters.  So you end up with one side chanting Black Lives Matter and the other side chanting Blue Lives Matter... guess what - both are EXACERBATING THE PROBLEM!
I liked your other thread.  Let's discuss this on the basis of the 2nd Amendment.  That's a heckuvalot better discussion because the 2nd Amendment is color-blind.
People are racists.  That's not gonna change.  Heck, I'm Filipino and even with all us brown-skinned pacific islanders we have our own "caste system" of discrimination - the mestizos versus the morenos, the tagalogs versus the bisayas... even the Black people have their own discrimination with Beyonce's lighter skin of higher value than Lupita's darker skin.  The whites have their own with the Polish versus the Italians, etc.  It is an instinctive mortal condition that is deeply tied to Survival Instincts.
Fighting racism by racist methods is, therefore, only going to end up with bad results.  Yes, People are Racists.  The American Rule of Law is not.  So, junk the Black Lives Matter, Blue Lives Matter, All Lives Matter... DUMP IT ALL.  That's exacerbating the problem.  Rather, unite behind a color-blind concept... THE RULE OF LAW MATTERS.  That means, strict adherence to the Constitution, highly competent justice system, respect for law enforcers, and PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE, among others.  Miscarriage of justice is fought, people leading a life of crime is fought, police brutality is fought, defiance of authority is fought, jugements-by-youtube-video is fought, all without deference to any race, creed, or color.
It starts with Me and You!

I think son of perdition like mankind is meant to encompass women as well.

The simple answer is "yes" God blesses all of his children as the rain falls on the just and the unjust. The sun shines on the just and the unjust. All we have are blessings from God, whether a man/woman rejects deity doesn't matter. He blesses them, which is also why in the end all will exclaim "They ways are just" even atheists, because they will then see his hand throughout their lives, where he blessed them, where he sought after them, and still they rejected him.
An increase of intelligence is a gift from God. If an atheist has a child, that child is a gift from God. Whether or not, they claim it, reject it, matters very little. He blesses them within the bounds of predicated laws as already mentioned, and what we sow we reap, and sometimes we sow and don't reap.

Remember that mortal life isn't the total of our existence.  Everyone on earth at one time accepted God.  And, I'm sure everyone prayed and pleaded for his help to some degree.  Some people just aren't aware of this because they have forgotten.  All blessings from God are because of obedience.  Some of the obedience was before this life.
On a related note, keep in mind that while on earth everyone rejects him to some degree.  
 
Here are some scriptures related to your questions.
D&C 130:20-21
 
Matthew 5:44-45
 
Galatians 6:7
 
I wish I could add more scriptures and provide commentary explaining how they answer your questions, but I'm short on time.  Maybe you'll learn some things pondering these or maybe someone else will provide good answers before I get back to it.
One other thing to remember -- a heart changed and intelligence gained is much more valuable than any short term prosperity we experience.

Something interesting I read in a discussion in another group.  The topic was actually about whether we raise our hand to sustain those called to serve when we are visiting a ward that is not our own.
This I found on lds.org:
What does it mean to sustain my Church leaders?
As members of the Church, we have the opportunity to sustain those the Lord has called to serve. We raise our hand to indicate that we sustain the General Authorities and officers of the Church and each of the leaders in our wards and stakes—including Young Women class presidencies. Sustaining leaders involves more than just a raised hand—it means that we stand behind them, pray for them, accept assignments and callings from them, obey their counsel, and refrain from criticizing them. 
 
What I found interesting was the last 4 words.  Refrain from criticizing them.  How often do we see this happening?  Quite a bit.  Yet we raised our hand to sustain them.
 
 

Now anatess2, in my opinion, this line is scripture...given by the spirit of truth. Thank you.

As to the first question regarding "[promising] each other that they would meet" doesn't appear to be inline with any doctrine (at least to the majority of God's spiritual heirs). Now, could we have known each other -- yes, for sure! What about Joseph Smith? I wouldn't be surprised if this was true for Emma and Joseph. Adam met Eve before they were spiritually organized in the Garden of Eden, did they make any promise? We don't know.
This also steps very close to the pseudo doctrine, "I have to find the one!" I remember one of my teachers at BYU, who also taught seminary, explaining how a man who was in his 40's (married with 4 children) had met a wonderful young lady he worked with. He strongly believed he received a spiritual witness that she was "the one." He divorced his wife, left his family, and married this wonderful young lady -- "the one." The Lord would have never provided such a witness, no matter how much a person wants to convince themselves, "It was confirmed by the Spirit." 
The concept of "plural marriage" in some instances would confirm this principle to be a pseudo doctrine; however, again possibly for a small majority this will not be the case. Did Nephi find his one, or would he have chosen a different partner if they stayed in Jerusalem? 
This teaching would beg other questions, "What made one child fortunate enough to be even close to the one he made the promise to, while others were born on separate continents, or even different generations. The promise brings back to my remembrance this song from Last of the Mohicans (I Will Find You), "No matter where you go I will find you...if it takes a thousand years." Here are principles of doctrine one will have to take in mind regarding any promise (not made by God) in our counsels in heaven:
1) Moral agency -- how many of our brothers and sisters made a promise, even to God, and are not living up to such due to moral agency? And God will not interfere with our free mind.
2) Listening to the spirit through righteous living -- how would a person be directed to "their one" if they were born on separate continents, or even same state but different cities, according to God's will? The only way would be through righteous living and living close to God's spirit. How many of us actually live close enough to this spirit that we would be able to listen to such delicate promptings that would direct us in the right direction? What sin would have caused such to be lost?
3) God already knew who we would marry -- imagine one of our brothers or sisters making a promise and God is thinking, "Great promise, but I have already seen your choice in a companion, and it wasn't her."
4) God is perfectly just -- What principles would make it fair and just that some were able to choose, promise, their companion "I will find you" (and they are found), while others simply had to "make do" (poor choice of words but that appears to be in line with "second best") with a second choice. "I wanted her, but I was born a thousand years before her, so I had to make do." Now I have a new "one and only" -- so to speak. As God is no respecter of persons than some principle/law would have to in place for God to remain such.
5) Soul Mates, "Soul mates' are fiction and an illusion; ... it is certain that almost any good man and any good woman can have happiness and a successful marriage."
"While I am sure some young couples have some special guidance in getting together, I do not believe in predestined love. If you desire the inspiration of the Lord in this crucial decision, you must live the standards of the Church, and you must pray constantly for the wisdom to recognize those qualities upon which a successful union may be based. You must do the choosing, rather than to seek for some one-and-only so-called soul mate, chosen for you by someone else and waiting for you. You are to do the choosing. You must be wise beyond your years and humbly prayerful unless you choose amiss” (Eternal Love [Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1973], p. 11).
These are a few principles I can see off-hand that would interfere with this concept, particularly #5 as given by President Spencer W. Kimball.  EDIT: This statement, "But my feelings have been wrong before of course." is for all of us. We, ALL, at times will find ourselves believing something to be true, which is false. The Brother of Jared experienced this when he saw God's finger. The Apostles during Christ's life, asked the Lord regarding the blind man "who sinned" and they were shared true doctrine. What matters most, is how we respond when truth is provided. Do we humble ourselves, or do we turn away from the Lord like others who no longer followed Jesus because he spoke hard things? That is our choice, our moral agency.   So, I would be less concerned about being wrong, and more concerned about the heart that changes when truth is shared, because we will ALL be wrong at some point. 

We do know, as President Spencer W. Kimball has said, "Soul mates' are fiction and an illusion; ... it is certain that almost any good man and any good woman can have happiness and a successful marriage." The promise of meeting our mates, coined "soul mate," in our pre-mortal life is fiction an illusion.
The idea of meeting our current spouse wouldn't be fiction. We knew many of our spiritual brothers and sisters before coming here.

So... the Temples in the Philippines (there's 2 of them) are magnificent buildings and costed a lot of money.  Not even 10 miles away from both temples is extreme poverty.  So, when the temples were getting built, a lot of Filipino Mormons felt uneasy because they have first-hand experience on the hardships of the people around them and all the work the EQ and RS do to help these people on a shoestring Bishop's budget.  So then, Filipino Mormons wonder... why did the Church build such a magnificent structure that cost so much.  Why didn't they just put the temple in a modest house of worship like the ward buildings and put that money saved on the Bishop's budget to help the poor?
But then they progressed farther into the gospel and learned that they need temple ordinances to make more covenants.  And tons of Filipino Mormons got their temple recommends but can't do anything about it because they don't have the means to go out of the country.  Even after the temple in Manila was completed, people from Central and Southern Philippines still found it difficult to go to the temple and so a lot of them held their temple recommends in their pockets, cherished them, remained faithful to them, and prayed that a temple will be built closer to them.
Well, the First Presidency don't just build temples anywhere.  One of the requirements for a temple to be built in an area is if there is a lot of members that are temple worthy (includes tithes) in the area that will necessitate the building of the temple.  So, all these Filipino Mormons in Central and Southern Philippines put a priority on missionary work as well as temple preparation.  They worked soooo hard!  And finally... the temple in Cebu got built.  The joy of these Mormons when the temple finally opened was palpable.  All of a sudden, the cost and expense of building such a House of the Lord seemed all worth it now.  They understood that the work inside these temples are worthy of ANY cost.
Now, imagine the people who have died.  They know they need temple ordinances to progress.  The difference between them and us is... they are completely dependent on the living to do their temple work.  They can't do missionary work, they can't pay tithes, they can't do much to get somebody living to perform their work.  I imagine that out there in the Spirit World, the spirits know that a temple is worthy of ALL of Cesar's money.
Just my 2 cents.
 

You've asked a lot of good questions here Reece, I'll try to address them all--
* Your parent's sealing-- your parent's sealing will be done, whether it by them in this life or vicariously afterwards.  Yes, I see that you posted they are currently divorced: in the highly probable event they don't get back together in this life, the sealing will still be done vicariously.   Does this mean that they have to honor it and get back together?  Of course not!  But they have the option if they choose it (our God is a God of having choices and not of forcing).  Will maybe your dad be sealed to your step-mom?  Maybe, if that is his choice.  
* Now, whether or not your parents choose to accept and honor the sealing ordinance is the next question.  Let's say that they do: yeah!  If they don't: then that is their choice and God will force no one to accept His gifts.  When will we know if they did/didn't accept?  Judgement day-- which is the answer for your parents, me, and everyone else in this world (men can never Judge another).
* "But what if they don't? Am I going to punished because they didn't?"   No, you will not be punished if your parent's don't accept their sealing.  Will you miss them if, or be sad about their choices?  Quite probably.  Will you be overall happy?  Beyond your wildest dreams--- the Lord takes care of His.  
 
Did I manage to hit your main questions?

So you priorities the living over the dead?   While I understand that mindset I think it is because you don't understand the magnitude of the numbers and the suffering that exists beyond death.
How many hundreds of millions have died without the ordinances of the gospel?  How many of those numbers have been taught the gospel since the Lord opened up the spirit world to missionary work two thousand years ago?  How many are stuck knowing the truth of the gospel but being unable to progress because their ordinance work has to be done vicariously by the living and that has only been going on in limited numbers for two hundred years?
There is a huge back log of human suffering that only the temple can fix... and you want less time and effort put toward it?  That show a limited vision of what the Lord is doing.
 
 
 
 
 

The Lord means the families to be forever. It is a crucial part of His plan of hapíness for us. Free agency is also an important aspect of the plan, so we need to consider what the LORD wants and what WE want in this matter. If you feel bothered that your parents aren't sealed, it's a just feeling and worth considering. Their agency at the moment of not being sealed can't and shouldn't influence YOUR agency of having your own sealed famaly, though. For instance, my parents are sealed but not active. I feel bad about it, but it's their choice at the moment. I love them and always tell them how great our Heavenly Father's love for us all is and encourage them to become active in the gospel. All in all, it's their choice, their agency. Me? I have been working on having my family sealing made sure. My wife and I work every single day on our celestial marriage and the spiritual welfare of our children. I'm using my agency to work this out and although I kinda suffer with my parents's absence, I'm happy to be on the way to Heaven. 
About the temples, they are the Lord's house. They belong to Him and that is what matters to me. The pattern for the temples since ancient times has always been this: the house of the Lord must be the best place on earth. You may think temples are extravagant, but what they really are is a piece of Heaven on Earth. Please, think about that.
Love you 

I don't see them as extravagant or expensive at all. Do they cost a lot of money to build? Of course, all buildings do. The interior though is not extravagant, but fitting for the beauty that is symbolic of what the temple is for. Not just because it is a house of God, but because of the purpose behind the ordinances performed and the symbolism behind everything. 

The concept of pre-existence promises is certainly not doctrinal. The romantic in me likes the idea however.

I read the following recently, from talk by Elder Melvin J. Ballard in 1922. It's had a profound effect on my life, so I thought I would share it:
 
"It is my judgment that any man or woman can do more to conform to the laws of God in one year in this life than they could in ten years when they are dead. 
"It is much easier to overcome and serve the Lord when both flesh and spirit are combined as one. This is the time when men are more pliable and susceptible. 
"We will find when we are dead every desire, every feeling will be greatly intensified. When clay is pliable it is much easier to change than when it gets hard and sets.
"This life is the time to repent. 
"That is why I presume it will take a thousand years after the first resurrection until the last group will be prepared to come forth. It will take them a thousand years to do what it would have taken but three score years and ten to accomplish in this life.
"I grant you that the righteous dead will be at peace, but I tell you that when we go out of this life, leave this
body, we will desire to do many things that we cannot do at all without the body. We will be seriously handicapped,
and we will long for the body, we will pray for that early reunion with our bodies. We will know then what advantage
it is to have a body.
"Then, every man and woman who is putting off until the next life the task of correcting and overcoming the
weakness of the flesh are sentencing themselves to years of bondage, for no man or woman will come forth in the
resurrection until they have completed their work, until they have overcome, until they have done as much as they
can do."
p.12, "The Three Degrees of Glory," Melvin J. Ballard, Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, 1922
http://www.shields-research.org/General/LDS_Leaders/Q12/Ballard_Melvin_J/01Three_Degrees_cap400x100.pdf

Eowyn, I am disappointed, you missed the most important one:
So there are few ways that you too, if you wanted, could become a Nehor. Let's put them in bullet points:
Claim that you have the word of God Claim that the Church does not Seek popularity Seek to take resources from those you "preach" to, and Do little or nothing of value Kill any individual who bests you in your knowledge, and then still hold your head high specifying you did nothing wrong.

Eowyn, I am disappointed, you missed the most important one:
So there are few ways that you too, if you wanted, could become a Nehor. Let's put them in bullet points:
Claim that you have the word of God Claim that the Church does not Seek popularity Seek to take resources from those you "preach" to, and Do little or nothing of value Kill any individual who bests you in your knowledge, and then still hold your head high specifying you did nothing wrong.

Orlando was one of the towns back in the '80's that gave new life to conceal carry.  They were having serial rapes happening, big news story for months and months.  Then there was a very publicized "All the women in Orlando come to this park and learn how to use your conceal carry gun" event.  Very well-covered in the news.  Rapes went down 80% and stayed there.  The total number of rapes in Orlando and the surrounding area stayed about the same, meaning that the rapists just sought victims outside of Orlando, but yes, Orlando fixed their rape problem.  I think John Lott coined this the "Orlando effect" in one of his books.
 
 

Very serious stuff. I pulled this from the Cop-centered Facebook page Survive the Streets: 
In what is described as a hail of gunfire, an Orlando (FL) PD SWAT officer took a round to his ballistic helmet while he and his team made entry into the nightclub and killed the suspect responsible for the attack. The helmet did its job, and the officer escaped with non-life threatening injuries.
 

Indeed.  Condolences to the victims and their loved ones.  Disagree though I may with their lifestyle, in this instance the bottom line is that they were humans, they were Americans, and they were supposed to be free and secure.  
With regard to Islamic extremism, it will be interesting to see whether the "they hate us for our freedoms" argument now gets a little more traction than it hitherto has.

Maybe you'd prefer this one of Hillary...

(Sorry in advance - I realise that this is a sensitive topic)
 
LDS teaching states that Jesus was born the natural way (ie God became man and He and Mary did the usual practice involved in child-bearing). How is this possible? Is God the same person as Joseph because, if not, then either Mary committed adultery or God impregnated her against her will - which, let's face it, is a pretty shocking thought. I asked the missionaries via txt a while ago and they said that they do believe in the virgin birth, but statements released by prophets say otherwise.