NightSG

What if you make your own, watch it yourselves and don't share?

Maybe there's somebody there he really wants to kill and/or commit adultery with when he gets there.

Well, it's different: I so want to find a dance class: (Yes, the lyrics are fine. Not sure how he decided on that title.)

AFAIK, except for something like murder or child molestation, there would be a lot of factors that might be considered in determining action to be taken. Time elapsed between offense and confession without a relapse would be one, as well as attitude at confession. For example, a person who committed adultery years ago, but hasn't relapsed and ultimately confesses voluntarily with obvious penitence would likely be treated much less harshly than someone caught in the act yesterday who tries to blame it on their spouse for not doing something they want. What I'm not sure of is serious sins committed during an excommunication; would they need to be confessed before rebaptism? If not normally, then could this be made a condition when the excommunication is initiated? Could the time of the excommunication be set to, say, one year after the last occurrence of a serious sin including any committed while excommunicated?

In my experience, (and yes, I'm divorced, so I've been there) one of the biggest problems a man will have with a larger woman is the choice between remaining righteous and remaining happy. I've never had a thin woman ask me if an outfit makes her butt look big, but there's just no answer that is both fully true and happiness-promoting to a woman who shouldn't be trying to blame it on the outfit. (For reference, just saying no because the outfit has nothing to do with it won't be believed either.) And no, trying to divert it with "you're beautiful to me" doesn't work either. Even if it's as true and complete as the Gospel, it will be taken as "you're a revolting cow to everyone else, but I, and I alone love you enough to overlook that." I've occasionally pondered how Christ Himself would have handled such a question, and all I could come up with was complete silence. There just isn't an answer that is simultaneously honest, kind and believable. Unfortunately, when I tried silence, it was received even worse than "you're beautiful to me." IMO, the only good way out of this is if you can, in full and complete honesty, say "no, in fact it makes you look so good I'm not taking you anywhere outside this bedroom for a few hours," and be fully prepared to back that up. Unfortunately, as I mentioned above, those women generally don't need such an assurance, so they don't ask. ETA: Ok, it's not entirely true that they never ask, some athletically-built women who think they're fat do. Unfortunately, the last one that I really wanted to give that last answer to waited until after I converted to ask.

IIRC, the Gospel Principles audiobook is also available on iTunes for free.

I've had some lit & comp classes that were pretty spirit-crushing.

What makes you think I do?

Still gerund-as-noun is common enough that a grammar checker should recognize it even when plural. Think "beatings," "ratings," etc. I know that specifically I've seen "sealings" used as a plural noun in road maintenance paperwork, referring to separate applications of seal coats. At any rate, a simple right-click and "add to dictionary" fixed it here.

No, he misspelled eelings with an extra a. It's sort of like a baptism, but with a little something extra in the font.

Especially if they have the option to refuse it.

Wait...could I get excommunicated as a proxy for someone?

Um, yes, you do. The Prophet was still human, and there are certain details we want left out of anybody's account.

That's not respect, it's fearful deference to a tyrant.

First off, let me say that I'm still dealing with some anger management issues myself. He does have to do his part in this, especially in recognizing the problem in the first place and wanting to fix it. That said, if he will work to fix it, help him do that. Don't "give him space" unless he wants it, and understand that from time to time you may have to let him vent and not walk away yourself. Just let it wash over you and forgive him as long as he's willing to keep putting in the effort to improve. Never taunt him (even if you think you can defuse the situation with humor, by the time it gets to this point, it's too late and the attempt will likely push him over the edge) or walk away when he starts to get mad, just calmly tell him that he's starting to sound angry, and that you'll only continue the discussion as long as he doesn't blow up. If he does blow up, clam up. Answer questions as calmly, neutrally and briefly as possible, and you improve the chance of him realizing that he needs to stop. Of course, if he does try to physically hurt you, get away from him and don't even think about coming back until he's had real psychological help, if at all. If he won't do his part, then there's really nothing you can do. It takes two to have a relationship, and it takes two to save one. Putting up with it when he won't work with you isn't doing either of you any favors. For your own sake, do everything you can to get past these; they will just get worse as you try to get through other hardships. Doctors are sometimes worse than useless unless they will go to the trouble to look for an underlying cause. Priesthood blessings certainly can't hurt. Even stress reduction hypnotherapy helped me with them to an extent. (And it helped more in other areas of my life.) It happens, and without knowing your husband, nobody can say whether he's really willing to work with you to fix it, or just thinks it will fix itself if you come back. Tell him he needs to show some serious effort first. Offer to get counseling together again, and separately as well. Set a deadline six months to a year out to see if there's real progress. If there is, then save your marriage. If you can work it out, never assume that any further counseling or other help he asks for is unnecessary, even if you go years without another problem. If he wants to get more counseling later, something in his brain is telling him to do it for a reason.

I have to agree, and the best example of marriage that I've seen was my maternal grandparents, who mostly raised me after my parents were divorced and my father was killed. Sure, they argued weekly, (I sometimes wonder if they actually scheduled an afternoon for arguing) but they were still completely devoted to each other and their marriage. They never let the sun set on their anger, and in 44 years, I'm pretty sure neither of them ever gave a thought to divorce. When grandma got sick, granddad stayed right by her side until the hospital staff convinced him that she could not only hear him, but also smell him. Then he got a motel room a block from the hospital and for the next two weeks, he still spent 16 hours a day by her side. For four more years after she died, he would talk to her chair. After he was mostly paralyzed in a wreck, he would have conversations, and sometimes arguments with any empty chair in the room. You'll never convince anyone who heard him that she wasn't there in some way, every single day. I've known couples who might appear to be better off, in that they rarely argued, and certainly not with the verbal intensity my grandparents did, but I sometimes wonder if what they had was more of a matter of sharing everything with each other, even the worst of it in the form of anger, venting it so that it wouldn't damage the most precious thing they had.

Like any method of voting, though, the problem comes from uninformed voters. How many of the people boycotting know what the founder actually said that was so offensive?

Believe me, it's a lot more romantic than divorce court.

Speaking as someone who just had a final decree hearing this week, I'm going to have to say you should be as selective as you want to be, then a lot more than you want to be, then more than you ever thought you could stand to be. FWIW, divorce is a lot like throwing up; it's not fun in itself, but the hassle and pain is nothing compared to whatever made you need to do it in the first place.

IMO, the primary problem with it is that it fails to recognize the fact that not everyone's Sabbath is on Sunday. Why would it be wrong to cause a Jew or Seventh Day Adventist, for example, to work on Sunday? (Of course, this assumes you know the religion of the person you're causing work for, but especially in a small town like mine, that's not really a stretch.)

Reminds me of working tech support. User got some long error message, so I asked him to email it to me next time it popped up. Silly me, I expected text, not a truecolor TIFF over dialup, at fullscreen resolution.

And there were other types of food. The cheese was just memorable because it was actually quite edible and had a shelf life that would put MREs to shame.

AFAIK, usually in his office meeting with all the people that need to meet with him but can't during the week for whatever reasons.

Something like that did work fairly well; remember government cheese?

Saliva tests are $15, and easy to administer and read. Only do urine/blood/hair/whatever tests on the ones that fail the saliva test. It wouldn't take kicking too many abusers off the welfare rolls to balance out the cost of testing,