Gwen

the mission president allowing us to have missionariey in our branch comes and goes, mostly because of our inability to feed them. we have few families that can feed them. most due to income, and others due to family circumstance (single sisters, unreceptive spouses, and what not). when we have missionaries we put a box out front and ask members to bring food, prepared or can goods, so we at least try to fill thier pantry. there are really only two familys that could feed them in the home and one of those lives on the edge of branch boundries so the miles just aren't there for them. that basicly leaves my home. to feed them according to what the ideal would be they would be eating at our house 5 nights or more a week. which financially and realisticly is almost impossible. so anyway, my point is that i truely understand the struggles for the units that have trouble feeding the missionaries. the irony for me is that the ones who can't support the missionaries are the ones that need them the most. very frustrating.

no hard feelings of fault finding from me. this topic is a realm of majority opinion on everyones part. :) i too find it interesting how so many can ponder the same scriputres and same scientific evidence and have so many different views to it all. your point 1 i too agree with and beleive. that is why i think he did not change species to species. i can't give you any more reason than i already have as to why i see it this way, but i do. point 2 i aslo agree with which is why i beleive scientist have no business messing arround in labs trying to clone and change one thing into another. there is a purpose for science and it has done wonders, but we can go to far. we were given a method of creating life and it wasn't in a test tube. your take on the command to reproduce after thier own kind. that i find a very interesting perspecitve. it will give me something to ponder, however, doesn't change my opinions. :) again, it may be possible but not what was intended for this earth. part of my perspective on that command was to reinforce we were to reproduce. given the cost, the long term responsibility, and the difficulty in raising offspring, and just bringing them into this world we probably would have ended the species long ago. the command alone wasn't enough to ensure our contiunation so we were also give a very strong desire and payoff to ensure we took the risk to begin with. but that is the other thread. lol but thank you for your perspective, it will be fun to ponder. i guess we'll all get our answers when we return home.

lol i should have seen that one comming. all activities intended to produce that result, was my point. you can't help the natural occurances in the body, that is the way god intended it. that must be delt with, that is why we were also given inhibitions and self controle. you shouldn't go seeking temptation and then expect sympathy when you partake. sgallan "I do not have an issue with your standards being guided by your faith. But I am not of your faith. Nor are most people. So how does society broker the differences?" i don't have all the answers as to how society brokers the differences. i do know that individuals not of my standards have done studies to show that this kind of material is damaging to a culture and society. maybe that less biased info should be used to come up with the answer. as for myself, that is the standard i use. and i have been given self controle and good sence to govern myself even if i think society is way off. my problem is when this imaging is being put on my children without my consent, ie, the commercials i mentioned. keep it in the id required section please, to respect my standards. that is what i would like to see happen.

i never said he could not. but i beleive he would not. and i know that is my opinion and i base this off of the command to multiply and reproduce after own kind. a command given to every living thing capable of reproducing even the plants. an apple tree will never produce peaches or grapes. a monkey will never produce a human. a pig will never produce an elephant. that is just the way he set it up. that's how i see it anyway.

first i'll admit that i have not read this topic in entirety, so if my thoughts don't fully fit sorry. lol i personally beleive in eveloution within a species, and i think there is more than enough science to support that. i do not beleive in eveloution between species, monkeys (or lizards, or anything else) to humans theory. yes i know that science has shown some similarities between the species that is very interestig. i personally see it as proof of a creator, a God who is creator of us. how many of you can look at a painting and guess with accuracy who the painter was, or listen to a song and know the artist, or look at a house and know who the architect is? all intelegences, ppl, spirit, souls, (whatever you want to call it) have a personality that is unique to them. if there is one god, one creator, and this world is his creation, or art so to speak, would there not be similarities? maybe the similarities are just a reflection upon the personality of our creator? just my thoughts on eveloution.

the issue here in my opinion is that of the sexual nature. the difference between art and playboy is the intended purpose of the picture. playboy depicts people in positions that are intended to create sexual arousal, art however is not (not typically and if it is it is not art). the human body is beautiful and was designed to be so. all art is intended to stir emotions, it wouldn't be good art if it didn't. the question is which ones is it intended to stir? when i see a picture of a mother breastfeeding a child it does stir emotions, that of a mother, the memories i have of those days with my own children, the beauty of that, not sexual. by the same measure you can have pictures of someone fully clothed who are in very provocative positions that is intended to stir sexual feelings, in my opinion that is as bad as the nudity. i have formed my opinion based on the teachings of the church. to quote the "For Sreangth Of Youth" (bold added my me) "Before marriage, do not do anything to arouse the powerful emotions that must be expressed only in marriage. Do not participate in passionate kissing, lie on top of another person, or touch the private, sacred parts of another person’s body, with or without clothing. Do not allow anyone to do that with you. Do not arouse those emotions in your own body. In cultures where dating or courting is acceptable, always treat your date with respect, never as an object to be used for your lustful desires. Stay in areas of safety where you can easily control your physical feelings. Do not participate in talk or activities that arouse sexual feelings." this says to me the activities are to be determined by each individual, there are some absolutes, but you must eveluate yourself and if there is any activity or conversation that arouses you it is up to you to sensor and not participate. ex. if a foot rub is arousing it is off limits. to continue from the for streanth of youth "Dancing can be fun and can provide an opportunity to meet new people. However, it too can be misused. When dancing, avoid full body contact with your partner. Do not use positions or moves that are suggestive of sexual behavior." again same message to me, the issue here is the sexual implications and the issue of purpose to cause arousal. that is how i see it, it's not he amount of nudity, the purpose designed when created. so old playboy, new playboy, spots illistrated, victoria secret cataloge, it's all the same. oh, and the tv comercial (that my children can potentialy see) where the two people are dancing suggestively in the rain to sell tires, or the one that is extreamly suggestive to sell rice, those too are the same. so to repeat the phrase from the 1st post "systematic desensitization", absolutely.

i would agree almost compleatly with you mop. one change. first God, then self (as in testimoney, and health, not anything that hurts or takes away from family, self not selfish), spouse, family (as in children and then extended, however responsibility to extended should never take away from any of the preceeding people. if so then take them out of the equation all together), then work. i had a stake pres that said we juggle a lot of balls in life, home, family, work, church, etc. the balls are all rubber except family. family is a glass ball. if we must drop all the balls to catch a failing family then do so, if it hits the ground it shatters to never be regained. church, work, all others will eventually bounce back. i too have a testamony of when following the Lord's will in place of our own, or first having his blessing on my will before following through with the choice, things go better. i know that my heavenly father knows me and my abilities. following my will alone i would sell myself short thinking i was not capapble of something i could do. by following the lord even when i think i can't and having trust in him, i've found that i'm capable of so much more and i've grown into someoe i didn't know i could be. i'm glad to be the person i am, and know the lord will continue to guide me to be the best i can, return to him, and have the greatest happiness this life can offer me and happiness in the next. if i will but trust and follow him, even when it does not make since in my limited understanding.

any time Dr T

lol, when you posted it i was confused and looked at mine, and then realized it could have looked like i did something to warrent that comment, an attitude problem. lol still funny though

it wasn't about my attitude. :) it was in a talk a member gave talking about a note his mom left on his bed in high school after a week of bad attitude. didn't realize the implications of how i wrote that. lol thanks for pointing that out Dr T

heard this one today. attitudes are contagious... is your's worth catching?

it could be mis diagnosis or it could be that we are just willing to aknowledge that it's there more than others? i personaly sometimes think that there is no such thing as LD, that society created a way that they want everyone to learn and anyone who is different must be a disability. maybe we are just all different and it's more of a discovery of learning style than LD. but it is the world i live in and must use terms they understand. can't change it all overnight. lol

a note on the learning disabilities and the ADD. i'm not in any way saing there is not a conection between the shots and stuff, but what about family history? i have learning disabilities and ADD as well as most of my family. there is a connection there. is it possible that the understanding of these disabilities is finally becoming known and thus the rise of diagnosis? is it possible that the two are being understood together and thus on the rise together? is this a cause and effect or just happening together? i really don't know. i'm asking those who may. i know i've worked as a private tutor for children with LD and ADD and anything else you can think of, and although it was only the child diagnossed i could after working with the family with fairly good accuracy pick out one of the parents with the same difficulties (family history connection). all i'm saying is that when it comes to some of this stuff there are so many reasons things could be happening.

i don't like all the horror stuff. my kids aren't allowed to dress up as anything bad, or evil. we had a pumpkin, tigger, superman, and a hot pepper this year. i get anoyed with the houses that want to scare little kids or those who wear full face masks and then get up in my kids faces. i tell them exactly what i think. one thing that also bugs me is this year we had a teenager go with us and she dressed up and had a bag but people didn't want to give her candy because they thought she was to old. but we had an old lady come to our house in full face mask so you couldn't tell it was an old lady. at least the teenager was honest about who she was. anyway. one of the houses had a man dressed as jason, mask, and everything. from what i'm told he had a decent costume (i haven't seen the movie myself). anyway my 5 yr old asked him, 'what are you'. he said 'i'm jason.' and my son said, 'no what is your costume supposed to be.' lol i figured so much for that plan, real scarry.

another testament (or more of something) is not the same as different. we preach the bible, we teach the bible, we read the bible, and we acknowledge the bible as scripture. therefore we are teaching the same gospel as the bible. we also claim to have a second witness to it, or another testament, that supports the gospel of the bible. Said the Apostle Paul, “In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established” (2 Cor. 13:1). (from lds.org) sorry to answer for you des. :)

my husband was sealed to his first wife, they divorced, and then we were sealed. so yes that can become a concern. :) to every law or comand there is a preperation. if you can't live the law of tithing then you will not be asked to live the law of consecration (where you give all to the lord). why? well, if you can't handle 10% then you will never be able to handle 100%. marriage is the same way. if you can not live a convenant marriage here then you will have no promise of marriage in the next. being sealed is not a gaurentee, it is a contract. you create a contract between eachother and the lord. if you .....treat eachother like you should and live according to god's command.....then god......will allow your marriage to be eternal. if you don't keep a then god won't keep b. it's like the atonement. the door has been opened to repent, but if you do not then you have no forgiveness for your sins. there are no blank checks in this life. you must do something to get something. so, my husband, though there is paperwork that says he was sealed to his first wife, has no claim upon her and she has no claim upon him. they failed to keep their end of the contract and therefore have no promise to the other. even if my husband and i leave this life married, if our marriage was one that was inappropriate (abuse or such) then there will still be no promise. being sealed is an open door we must walk through together, if we do not then it means nothing. that goes for proxy as well, what if someone lived and died with the best possible marriage one could have in this life, and shared a love that could stand the span of eternity but did not ever know about the sealing ordinance. a mercyful and loving god would not force them to spend eternity single. someone would be sealed proxy thus opening the door for them to have the promise of an eternal marriage they lived worthy to. also if proxy is performed for a couple who is not worthy of such it does not give them a privliage they do not deserve, we just went through the motions, but it did nothing. it is not for me to decide if my ancesters are worthy of said blessings, that is god's job. it's my job to open the door so that justice can be given if it is decided they are worthy of said blessings.

ok, sorry for the misunderstanding. :) do you still have ties to your parents? what about your children, do you want to be a part of their adult lives? or your grandchildren? why would keeping in touch with your family here after you/they are grown be so important if their place in your life is over? i think we desire our family connections because in our hearts we know it is important. also for me it creates a physical connection to my Heavenly (spiritual) Father. he is the father of my spirit and by being physically sealed and following your family back through time, you will eventually in some way connect back to Christ (his physical son) as well as to Noah and Adam. this for me creates a physical connection to my spiritual father. in my mind that compleats the family circle so to speak. the eternal family circle where we are a family in body and spirit for eternity. that is my personal perspective on it. there are those who may or may not agree. but that is why it is important in my life, the physical, spiritual, eternal conection to those you love, have struggled through mortality and grown in spiritual stature with, and to my heavenly father.

when we put our children in school we assume they want an education. if when they are old enough they don't want one they are free to discontinue it. but we as parents know that an education is best and would rather them say 'you know i really didn't want that' then one day say 'why didn't you' education allows progression, but doesn't force it. you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink. standing proxy is leading to water, or opening a door. it is still up to the individual to drink or to go through the door. if they don't want it, and not all will, they simply don't need to accept. we stand proxy to both fulfill justice and mercy. justice demands the ordinances for progression. mercy says it's not right for someone who never had a chance to be punished for something out of their contorle. this way the justice is taken care of and how mercy is handled is between them and the lord. when christ was proxy for us in suffering for our sins durring the atonement, he assumed we all wanted it. weither or not i use the atonement and repent is up to me, but he opened the door because he loves me. i help open doors because i love my family and i was told by christ through his choosen leaders to do it. i was commanded to open the door for them, not to push them through. just my take on it. :)

sorry, how does your faith or your understanding of things reconcile the delema? that you need baptism, that none will be deprived the opportunity of salvation, but some live and die without opportunity to have this ordinance.

so what do you do for those who live and die without opportunity to have these ordinances? say in countries where their freedom is limited and it is witheld from them.

why couldn't we travel between galaxies? is there anywhere in the universe god can't go? if we become like our father, why would there be restrictions on where we could go? assuming the highest glory, those who do not attain will have limits, but why could we not visit them? all of this being on the grandiose assumption that i will be there visiting others, not waiting on them to come and visit me. lol i don't know how it will happen, but why would it be impossible? yes, thank you. so do you beleive that there are ordinances, like baptism, that are required for enterence into any of the kingdoms?

thank you for clarifying that for me blessed. :) now i'm curious though, what does the RLDS beleive about temples and work by proxy? hope this off topic queston doesn't confuse anyone. Dr. T, i always pictured it working like this world only bigger. in the since that we travel the world to and fro visiting our adult children or parents. why couldn't we do the same on a universe perspective rather than this earth. the most important sealing is to my husband. we will live together, and our children (from this life) will have their spouses. those will be the most important relationships. the rest of the family relationships will be visiting and get togethers. that is my take on it anyway.

arround here is is "To show the opossum it could be done."

ok, so not south eastern then. lol kids with really blond hair called "toe heads" i guess that is what it is. people call my boys that all the time. "all the little toe heads their so cute" ???? does anybody know where that comes from? dishwater diarrhea - this one is kind of gross, and my have just been my dad. but we did not have a dish washer (imagine that), so part of our chores was to take turns helping do the dishes. we'll after dinner your hands get in hot water you have to pee. you get to the bathroom and there is no real incentive to be done, because you are going to go do dishes, so you read a book and claim to have to poo. by the time you get out mom has already done them. great plan, right? anyway, my dad used to get mad and tell us we couldn't go to the bathroom because it was dishwater diarrhea. i see my kids suddenly having to go to the bathroom when time to do chores, and we have a dishwasher. lol i'm thinking i might pass that one down. lol

my mom used to say something similar. if she saw behind our ears was dirty she would say, "you could grow potatos behind here?" or "what are you doing, growing potatoes back here?" stuff like that. took me years to figure out what that really meant. lol also dumber than a fire ant......well it was a different name for fire ant lol if we were too wiggly "floppin' around like a fish out of water" tangled hair was reffered to as a "rats nest" my dad used to say "well, that's just ducky" i've never heard anyone else around here say that so i guess it's not a southern saying, but i've heard "just peachy" used the same way lol a hard row to hoe