SpiritDragon

Sadly I must say that the fact that I can empathize with the person afflicted with pedophilia - seems a huge step toward admitting defeat (accepting it). Now to be clear I don't accept the action, but I do accept that we all have different struggles and temptations to overcome and for some this may unfortunately involve attraction to children. I think if pedophilia is ever embraced in the same way that society has embraced other sexual sin that we'll truly be ripe in iniquity. Simply by following the path of not seeing a pedophile as a monster, but a human with struggles (the way I believe the Saviour sees us all) does indeed seem to be a stepping stone toward having Christ-like empathy and love, while also easily being used as Satan's counterfeit to promote his evil agendas. Satan's counterfeit being that people lack the agency to rise above the tendencies of the natural man. Now to a great extend none of us actually do have the strength to rise above our sins, we need God's grace - the enabling power of the atonement - to overcome sins. There is no doubt that when Satan can take a beautiful truth and distort it into an ugly fallacy (with a seemingly beautiful veneer) and get it to be accepted as the truth he will always look to do so. We certainly live in the days when good will be called evil and evil good. The master of lies has done well to deceive the masses. It's particularly sad when even those who should know better champion the cause of Satan in the name of compassion and love. The fact is when my daughter likes to do something that is injurious to her physically, emotionally, or spiritually I fail to show love by allowing her to take the path of least resistance and just do it because she naturally likes it. I show love by teaching her she can be and do more by overcoming certain weaknesses.

I can also agree with this point. Perhaps it gets into one of those questions of terminology. for instance is being attracted to adult women as an adult male an evil desire - I think it is a natural consequence of a healthy mind and body. However desiring to sleep with your neighbour's wife who you're also attracted to is perhaps where the line is drawn beyond simply noticing she's attractive. Now I personally don't want to accept pedophilia as something that needs to be taught in sex ed to 7 year olds as an alternate preference blah blah... but if a man is attracted to children does that automatically equate to an evil desire - I would contend that it does not, but the line is likely fine as to when/where it becomes so.

This has always been my thought on the whole different sexual preference thing in the first place - I don't think very many people at all can act out all of there lustful desires to begin with, and I'm fairly confident that no one can and still walk with God. I mean I have urges to mate with many a female I encounter, but I have covenanted to only have that kind of relationship with my wife. Before marriage - nothing. So I don't understand the need to make it acceptable for others to indulge in their lusts. I agree completely though that this is the whole plight of man (the species, not the sex) to choose to follow God over our own carnal desires. Thus I too have admiration for the pedophile who never acts out on this urge. I can also agree that I find it admirable not to have wrongful desires in the first place, it seems safe to say that we all do have them. Weaknesses to keep us humble and lead to strength? i don't envy the person attracted to children - or the tobacco addict and so on.

I'd never heard of NAMBLA before (shudder ) what a disturbing movement. I understand that pedophilia is thought to afflict 1% of the population while the LBGT makes up 2-4%. So perhaps pedophilia is half as common - perhaps more common as well though because there just isn't much incentive to come out as a pedophile. This is really disturbing - another reason to homeschool?

I know that some in these forums have expressed concerns in the past that by opening the gates to accepting homosexuality and legitimizing marriages to cater to this perversion that it is only a matter of time before an irreversible tide of non-traditional marriages and sexual perversions almost by default will become accepted as well. I stumbled upon this article which outlines what the author believes to be steps being taken to help pedophilia gain mainstream acceptance. I also wanted to do a forum search to see that this hasn't been a recent discussion. I see that @Bini brought up a similar topic of discussion five years ago with this link. Anyhow I thought I'd ask if anyone thinks that just as homosexuality has gone from being deplorable and taboo to they can do what they want... to every city in the Western world holds celebrations of this "lifestyle" that pedophilia will indeed one day be seen as simply another sexual orientation. It's a little creepy to think that a self-professed pedophile might be allowed to work with my children because we shouldn't discriminate against anyone because of sexual preference (keeping in mind that for now anyway - it is illegal to act on pedophilic urges, but not illegal to be sexually attracted to children, as long as this "preference" is always repressed and never acted on.)

I also tried to get into the Shannara Chronicles having enjoyed the original trilogy and some of the other books as well. Anyway I found it to be all over the place, it had very little to do with the book and seemed a bit too dark and sexualized - in fact it would fit in with the CW line up.

100% spot on. When the structure is destroyed the function goes with it. A leg with a knee that lacks the stability to support weight shuts down ambulation. An eye that is no longer in the socket can't see. A trachea that can't pass air doesn't allow breathing. These things are independent of pain which can be ignored via drug use, the laws of physics still apply. Anyone packing for self defense is largely fooling themselves if they don't also train their body and mind to be the primary weapon to end the threat. There is just no guarantee that a side arm can be accessed first - if it can that's great, but if not, one really needs to be prepared to use other means until the firearm can be safely accessed.

So much better to watch the real shark jumping...

As far as current shows go, my wife and I follow Once Upon a Time - although I kinda wish it would just end. We started Agents of Shield and enjoyed the first season, waiting for the next season we lost interest - it seemed like the next season blew past us and we didn't know what was going on, it was too darkish and we just didn't know who the characters were anymore - we may try again some time. I also watched the 100 for a season - I quite liked it over-all and was curious to see how things played out, but in the next season I once again lost interest. It didn't help that they had a previously straight seeming girl turn lesbian on us, I get that the culture we live in feels the need to make sure that every show has a token homosexual - but do they have to play out the whole "I'm confused and exploring my orientation" thing... are you born that way? If so it should be straight forward what gender is attractive. Any way I digress. I prefer older shows as I find the entertainment value is higher and the corruption factor is much smaller. Some of my current favourites include The Andy Griffith Show and Petticoal Junction. I do find that Andy is just not the same in season 6 and beyond with the loss of Barney Fife. I've also been enjoying Bonanza from time to time - but I prefer 1/2 hour shows as I don't like being tied to the TV longer than that. When it comes to Star Trek, I found the original series a bit too random (disorganixed?) and campy for my taste as a whole - and yet I can still enjoy an episode here and there. My pick for best Star Trek is hands down The Next Generation, followed by Voyager, Enterprise and Deep Space Nine in that order. I've never watched the animated series. I'm amazed that the first Star Trek move (v'ger) didn't forever destroy the franchise, but I've enjoyed the others and find the reboot movies fun too. Quantum leap is great. I also like Early Edition, The Pretender, MacGyver, JAG (the series and the forum member ), and even a little A-team from time to time. My wife and I recently rediscovered ALF (I'd forgotten all about that furry alien) and so far it's not too bad either - I get scared to watch shows that I remember liking as a kid because I'm often not only disappointed in the show, but disappointed that I thought it was good in the past. Speaking of shows I watched as a kid, Full House is still okay for a few laughs - Fuller House isn't my favourite though, but not awful either (if you have some time to waste because your sick and you don't already have a line up of things to catch up it may fit the bill, but don't schedule time out of life to see it - but this probably holds true for all TV)

This was my initial thought when I heard he'd frequented the club - he was essentially surveilling his target.

That's an interesting idea. Our transition to solids has been to introduce pureed fruits and vegetables with breast milk mixed in.

My baby won't even take a bottle - she will fuss until she gets the comfort of having mom's breast. Now at nine months she does eat some solids, but she still breast-feeds as well, which we plan to keep up until she's around 24 months. It's not only a generational thing, but an ignorance thing. I know women in my ward who are still breast-feeding children of nursery age who get afraid to go to the mother's lounge because of what the other mom's might have to say about it. People need to just trust that parents are doing the best they can. My sister in law has really had some struggles making breast feeding work, but she has been persistent in trying because of the health benefits and bonding of it - while her husband and his mom criticize her for worrying too much and to just forget the whole thing and use formula. Then there are others that use formula and looked down on by the breast-feed or bust crowd and it just gets to be so silly - I don't understand why people, especially those who have been parents themselves, can't just be supportive and understanding of feeding choices. from the outside looking in we just don't know if a mom can't breast-feed or her baby won't take a bottle, or has allergies to common bottle materials, can't latch, won't nurse while covered and so on and so forth. Being a mom is tough, and mothers are just learning as well.

I think a lot of it stems back to the why marriage is important thread and certain theories about how the Saviour might have required marriage premortally to be considered God. So although we have a great idea about all the covenants and processes involved in becoming gods ourselves - there is a question of order I suppose. To my understanding LDS teaching maintains that to be Exalted requires Celestial Marriage or sealing. Thus some could question how is it possible for the son and Holy Ghost to be God without having eternal companions - now my take is simply that with an eternal perspective knowing that the sealing will take place is sufficient. I do believe that Christ either is or will be sealed to an eternal companion, but I don't think that the order of the event dictates whether or not He is God - more as a blessing that will not be withheld.

It's certainly possible, but I suppose shy of some new revelation we'll not likely know until the next life. Based on the understanding that we all have the potential to be gods, it would seem that we are all this type of being - of course in our fallen state we cannot realize further potential without the Atonement of Christ. Interestingly this seems to refer to the becoming unified as One aspect again. Assuming that the intelligences that can be made into the spirit bodies patterned after our Exalted parentage which can go on to become humans and then onto godhood constitute the type of being that make up God, but only those who are purified and brought forth from a fallen state actually become part of the collective one true God? Musings that may seem repetitive: The Father is God, The Son is God, the Holy Ghost is God, based on the idea of eternal marriage sealing two as one then the goddess spouses must also be God - but God is not any one of these, God is more. God is love - is love God? ...the family is central to the Creator's plan for the eternal destiny of His children... fundamental unit of society. Fundamental unit of Heaven? Fundamental unit(y) of God? I have to say that I am seeing a strong case for the idea of One true and living God - being one truly united and happy family continuing to progress and grow. its almost as if God is a family name and each individual member is therefore God by name, but God is greater than any one individual - as is the family. So those beings who are united through the sealing power to this family of God are adopted in and become one with God and thereby become God. Those who are not sealed or choose not to keep the covenants of the sealing do not become part of the one truly united family that constitutes God.

As a kid I was able to get one for a quarter when I entered the CTR class in primary. As an adult I've seen nicer ones for sale at LDS book stores, but they cost a fair bit more than twenty five cents I'm confident that if you don't have a store in your area that you could order one online. You might also look for ann LDS distribution center.

This is an interesting notion. The main concern that it raises for me is that it leads to the idea of finding "the one" that an individual is supposed to marry. Prophets and apostles have been clear on this being a false precept and encouraged the idea that any two worthy individuals of the opposing sex who are willing to work at it can make a marriage last for the eternities and that we should not be caught up looking for a soul mate.

Actually taking the God is a family point a step further, I've never really understood why we can't be saved without doing the temple work for our ancestors. If the family needs to be sealed together as one, it is very important indeed for us to have these connections in place to tie us in to the literal oneness of family or oneness of God as it were in this context.

I'm glad you've asked this important question - you'd think it would be simple to answer, but it is not - at least for me. Some thoughts: God is a calling or office that requires a great deal of purity and absolute dedication and obedience. God is a class or category describing the perfect maturation of the human species God is a constant ideology In any event God is made up of several component parts, and yet is One. Certainly the hope of many latter day saints is to become gods and goddesses and in so doing become one with God. It seems safe to say that while our Heavenly Father is God, that God is more than just our Heavenly Father - we know that the Holy Ghost and the son are also God, but God is not just the Holy Ghost or just the son. So then what is it that we become one with? Do we become one within a specific class or category wherein multiple parts can be of the same or One. Perhaps God is a family - even though we refer to any particular member of the godhead as God, that certainly doesn't mean that God is limited to the Godhead. The god-head may be a reference to the heads of the family? There is One priesthood - although there are divisions within it such as the Melchizedek, Aaronic and possibly others such as the Patriarchal priesthood - all are simply appendages to the one priesthood. Also within the one priesthood there are many priesthood holders and many different offices. Perhaps Godhood is more encompassing than we typically tend to think. For instance an angel that always does the will of the Father may very well have achieved oneness, and yet I tend not to think of angels as God but certainly part of the kingdom of God. I feel that I can say that I don't know "what" God is, but I have a good idea of the character of God - essentially who God is - God's personality. I think this is the more important piece of the puzzle to work out in this life and to emulate - but the what is certainly fascinating.

I just wanted to comment on some points regarding the idea of Christ being married pre-mortally - Does anyone besides Anatess share this notion? I find the whole idea of pre-mortal marriage to be extremely unlikely and it seems to me like it's not thought out well, but I wish to give the benefit of the doubt and if nothing else help think it out further. First of all the very term pre-mortal suggests just that PRE mortal - so the idea that Christ has already had a body of flesh and been perfected seems a contradiction. Also when the brother of Jared saw the premortal Lord it was explained to him how his body was a spirit but that ours were patterned after His. If he was already resurrected would he not have a body of flesh and bones and not of spirit? The idea that to be God requires him to be married premortally in my mind is missing an eternal perspective. Did he have to be created already married to be God? If He can be considered God from all eternity to all eternity, but get married at some later point - whether premortal, mortal or post-mortal - why would it matter when unless he was created married? If Christ had already been through the full process of testing would there have been any need to exercise faith in Christ in the war in heaven? I believe we still had to put faith in him that he would actually come through - we didn't know it was an already done deal. As for Lucifer's part how could he draw away a third part of the hosts of heaven if everyone knew that Christ had already succeeded, not that we would be counting on Him to? If Christ was already fully guaranteed success what did he risk, what did he sacrifice in coming down to Atone for our sins? Why did Satan bother tempting him if there was no possibility of successfully foiling the plan? I appreciate the Traveler's wondering if we even know what God is after discussions of this nature, because it seems that the fundamental issue here is what is pre-requisite to being considered God. I believe as the first born that Jesus has a direct birthright to Godhood, but He could most certainly have lost it. Agency applying to Him as well. Any way perhaps all these points have been considered and answered to other's satisfaction. They prevent me from thinking this particular suggestion (premortal marriage/sealing) is possible.

This is an interesting idea Anatess. From my perspective this isn't how it would be though, but I am as fallible as the next person - I'm just pointing out why I believe otherwise. We do sealings by proxy because just like Baptism this act requires a physical body. Therefore I don't believe that an eternally binding union could be performed in the premortal state. Thus the soonest Christ would have been married is in mortality to my understanding.

Rather than simply post my current thoughts I felt my actions could speak louder - so I've decided to respond by stating whether or not I've done these things. 1. Bring your own candy or drink into the movie theater? Guilty - I've done this once or twice as a teenager. I don't tend to feel comfortable with it though so I only did it the one or two times. 2. Share you online digital movie/tv service account password with others so they can view it from their own house too OR use someone else's? For example Netflix / VUDU Guilty-ish. My wife and I logged on to Netflix at my in-laws and forgot to log off and started noticing all kinds of new things popping up as watched that we'd never seen. We've never shared the password and would not really feel good doing so. 3. Invite a handicap/elderly person with you to an event so you can use their handicap parking tag? This has never occurred to me. I suppose if the individual wanted to go it wouldn't be all bad, but otherwise I'd suggest it is using them - showing a lack of class and respect for another human. 4. Use the other gender's single occupancy bathroom when you are out because your own gender stall is occupied, ex. gas station, restaurant, etc.? I'm pretty sure I may have done this, but I can't say for sure. Certainly if in dire need I would consider it, and I also might consider going in the opposite gender bathroom to help my daughter. 5. Avoid a call at home/work by having someone else say you are not there, when you really are? As a kid I did this from time to time, or was in the position of being accomplice to this act for another sibling. I'd also use hand signals to get my mom to say I wasn't allowed to go (loud enough my friend could hear it) to invites I didn't want to accept so that I wouldn't have to tell some one I just didn't want to spend time with them or go to a certain activity at this time. As an adult I just don't answer the phone if I don't want to talk to some one at home. 6. Leave one movie and walk into another at the theater when finished without paying? (My 65+ year old single mother does this. She says, "oh the theater doesn't care as long as you buy some popcorn every so often". She has done this for years and will watch 2-3 movies per visit) I have never and can't see myself ever doing this. 7. You are at a no saving seats event/meeting, but you still toss your coat, bag,etc across several seats to save them? When I know it is specifically a no saving seats event I get very annoted to see people doing so anyway. I don't like it, but I might cave in and do it under pressure from family. Although I might also be guilty of throwing aside some one's coat saving a place and inhabiting the seat when I know it shouldn't be there any way.

I don't see how it defeats the earth experience at all - but I suppose that depends somewhat on your personal view of the purpose of life. I tend to think of the co-existence between people in heaven will be very much like a married couple living on their own with the option to go visit in-laws or have the kids over. I see plenty of autonomy and space but also plenty of fulfilling socializing opportunities. But, I can also see how you could think of it as the family reunion that never ends.

We believe that we are literal spirit children of divine parentage. Eternal Marriage (temple sealing) is required to attain the highest order of the Celestial Kingdom (the highest heaven if you will). Only those in the "top level of the Celestial Kingdom" (exalted beings) have the blessing of "eternal increase" referring to eternal posterity. This eternal posterity is above and beyond the limits of nearly never ending mortal posterity (great grandkids to the nth degree on earth even following one's passing) but refers to direct posterity of spirits. Are there babies in Heaven? I don't know, not much is known about how spirits are formed and mature. What is know is that only those who are sealed for time and eternity enjoy the blessing of having infinite spirit offspring. I personally have loved having a baby around so much that I certainly hope there are babies in Heaven.

Single people can be in Heaven (Celestial Kingdom) but they are angels. To have the highest glory requires eternal marriage, at least in part for eternal off-spring it would seem. As for why the need for more? There are plenty of theories about why, but we really don't have any specific details to why that I'm aware of.

Completely agreed. I hope it didn't sound as though I was suggesting it should.