Gwen

I'm glad you are getting answers. There are no bad babies. Some are more difficult for the parents to deal with than others. Sometimes babies have aches and pains and it's a guessing game to figure it out. That baby loves you no matter how long it takes to figure it out. Hang in there. It sounds like you are doing a good job.

I'm not making an argument for or against the homosexuality and the marriage debate. I'm saying it's a distraction and a false sense of security to point the finger at someone else. There is a major problem among the covenant ppl when it comes to protecting the sanctity of marriage. If we don't admit and address that then it won't matter what gays do, the downfall will come from within. Remove the mote from your own eye before focusing on the beam in your neighbors. However, I do agree with you Traveler, we do legislate morals and we do need to be very concerned with the morals of society. I just think we better shape society by managing ourselves and saying "come follow me" than we do by saying "you should be/do....." while we break our own covenants. Many would call that hypocritical.

A marriage ceremony would contain the "marriage" part of it, the signing of the paperwork. Most do not make that part of the ceremony. The paperwork is a formality that is kept separate from the rest. However, without it there is no "marriage". There is an experation date on the marriage license and if you wait too long to send it in then you are not married, you have to start all over at marriage license stage. Before the days of marriage licenses and public records then preachers could marry ppl. They would do the whole thing and whatever ceremony they did was enough to be considered married. But all that has changed, "marriage" is not really in the hands of any religion. You can't show up at the temple or a church and get "married", you have to have the proper legal paperwork first. There is no ceremony for the paperwork, the ceremony is religious.

I don't understand why "the most abominable" sins are always thought of to be coming from someone that hasn't even got a testimony. When I read about the abominable things that are so great to offend god I usually end up thinking along the lines of denying the holy ghost. They aren't sins coming from ppl that don't know better. It's the sins from his covenant ppl that are so offensive and abominable. Satan is waging a war on marriage and things that are sacred but he's not doing it from the outside with the fanfare that so many think they see. That's the distraction so he can sneak into the ranks of the covenant and deceive them. He's doing it from within with rationalizations in breaking very serious covenants. I truly believe the divorce rate and the amt of single parents in our very own covenant ppl is the greater war on marriage. If we want to solve the marriage problem, protect the sanctity of marriage, then we need to start in our own home. I know there are times when things are permitted and maybe even necessary. I just have a hard time accepting there are as many exceptions as we are seeing happening.

The same "marriage" that is under debate. A civil "marriage" is the signing of the paperwork. You get a marriage license and then someone legally qualified watches you sign and they sign saying that it was you and it was your agency and not by force. That paperwork is then sent back to the county of the state you received the license and they record it in their records and they send you a certificate. You are civilly married. That can be done with as much or little fanfare as the couple desires. I have never been to a civil marriage in the temple but I would guess it's similar to the sealing ceremony with some changes. For example the command to multiply and replenish is not in the proxy ceremony. I assume what makes it a "civil" ceremony is that there is no eternal command/promise given. So there is a temple ceremony for this life only instead of the traditional eternal that we talk about. However, the civil marriage part of it is simply signing the civil paperwork in the temple presidents office before going back to the sealing room for the ceremony. The ceremony has nothing to do with the signing of the paperwork. The "civil" part of it is given very little recognition. All the focus is on the ceremony/religious portion of it. To be overly technical we don't perform marriage ceremonies. We perform sealings of those marriages in the temple. We make covenants with god and each other that go above and beyond "marriage". I'm not necessarily saying it's wrong to do it this way. Most church/religious ceremonies do it this way. The signing of the paperwork is done before or after privately with the preacher, no one actually signs paper in public. One thing I think that could be a good change however, is that the could do that signing before going in, say in the lobby instead of the temple pres office. Then parents who are not members could at least see that part. But I guess if not careful that could get out of hand to end up having mock ceremonies in the lobby and that wouldn't be cool at all. But I'm sure something could be figured out with enough thought. lol

Even now in the temple they are separate events. There are no "marriages" performed in the temple. You sign all the legal documents in advance of the sealing, the sealing is the only ceremony performed. That's how it was for me anyway. There are already countries that keep the sealing and marriage totally separate due to laws (all marriages must be public). It's not that big of a deal. The church can not be forced to allow gay sealings in the temples. I'm not so sure Heavenly Father would agree with you that a couple who does not love each other or take the covenant seriously is not an abomination. The sealing covenant is the crowning ordinance of this life, it is of the most sacred of anything else that will happen in the temples. Treating that casually is certainly an abomination. Where much is given much is required.

They can do proxy work at the same time. Let them know you have family file, they will probably be thrilled to help. If the family file first needs baptism, confirmation, or initiatory you need to get that done in advance or they will not be ready to do the same endowment session as you.

What is an abomination? To make something holy unholy. Couples that go to the temple casually and then fail to keep their covenants for flippant reasons mock the sacred covenants of the temple. They make something holy (temple covenants of eternal marriage) unholy (unjustified divorce). What is desolation? To be desolate. Wasted. Barren. Couples that enter into eternal marriage covenants who don't want children and fail to seek personal revelation in the decision making process become wasted. They fail to keep the covenant made to counsel with the lord in making childbearing decisions. Or how about couples that divorce for flippant reasons torturing their children with yrs and yrs of custody battles and arguing while breaking the eternal family they covenanted to protect. Or those that walk away completely leaving children without a mother or father when they have covenanted to teach and love that child/children. That's a pretty wasted and barren state. We also know that the generation that sees the Abomination of Desolation occur in the Temple will see the coming of Christ. I doubt we'll ever see gay marriage in the temple. However this generation has seen and will continue to see ppl go to the temple casually. We get questions every day from ppl asking about 2nd temple marriages after divorce. This generation has seen an abomination of desolation occur in the temple. I borrowed these thoughts from the op...... with some revisions of my own to make it make sense to me.... thought I would share.

Why couldn't the prisoners eat chocolate? It causes breakouts.

With the world news like it is of course they are learning this very young (though I don't recall watching much news and kids in my school were talking about it). The frustrating part for me is they can't just say things and be corrected like when we were kids, ppl take them seriously. Like the teachers dead song. Kids would get chastised about why that's inappropriate to say and next time you get your mouth washed out. Now the kids get expelled and sent for psyc evals because they think it's a death threat. Everyone take a deep breath and calm down. In light of all of that on a funny note, we (me and my 9 yr old son) were sitting in a psychiatrist's office waiting room. We were there for some evaluations for educational concerns. He had decided he'd been waiting too long and announces "I'm bored. I want to blow something up." lol Now he does not normally talk like this (gets in trouble if he does) and has never blown anything up, maybe seen some demo on tv. lol After that I knew he was in a mood and terrified of what he might say in the evaluations. lol

I think you are safe. Maybe guilty of over thinking and dramatizing things a bit? It's not wrong to think there might be a point to someone's argument. On a mission you will probably be faced with a lot of that. The key is to be able to separate fact from fiction. Remember satan will mix truth with deception, that's how he's so effective. So yes, deceptive arguments sometimes have a point. I would suggest reading those scriptures again, break it down and separate the truth from lies, ponder for yourself how you would approach a conversation like this. How is it approached by Alma? How can you handle such arguments on your mission so that you don't shut down the other person? You can agree with some of what was said while expounding upon what you don't. When we find something we can agree with someone on then it tends to keep minds open. Don't be afraid of pondering what you read, embrace the lessons the scriptures are meant to teach you. You are preparing for a mission, learn from the great missionaries in the Book of Mormon.

Not to distract from this thread but yes I am. lol To the op, your post has been on my mind a lot. It's not selfish to attempt to plan a "right time". Though always keep in mind that the lord may have a different "right time" in mind. I can understand being a school teacher and wanting to end things right. Fear about if you will be a good mother or not is pretty normal. Fear of losing the baby is also normal. Don't feel broken or alone because of those feelings. All you can do is the best you can with what you have. As mothers we don't control the baby's development, no matter what dr's say. The body that spirit gets (or if it grows to term) is between that baby and it's heavenly parents. Our heavenly father knows each of us, knows the kind of mother we'll be and how we'll grow, knows that baby and what they will need to make it back to him. If you're doing the best you can to keep your covenants then all will be fine. I know when you are full of fear the first thought at such comments is "that's easy for you to say or you don't know what it's like to be me". Please don't think because I'm on #6 it means it's easy for me. To be honest the path of having babies has been the greatest trial of my life. It's also been the source of so much growth. I do know what it's like to feel afraid of getting/being pregnant. Please consider getting the book I suggested. I really think it will give you a perspective that may just help you to feel excited about something that is such a huge unknown. It will also help you deal with the nonlds that are telling you just to not worry about having kids. It is a must read no matter what you decide for right now.

This is lesson I had to learn early on and unfortunately have to be reminded of a lot because I'm like you and tend to carry a lot of weight on my shoulders. Know which part is yours, learn to let go of the responsibility that isn't yours to carry. The first experiance I had with this lesson was as YSA rep for the stake. I was planning my first conference (and first event in the calling) and everything was falling apart. I had done all I could do but still felt the blame and weight of all the things I couldn't control that was falling apart. Things went wrong with the meeting room, the speakers, the attendance, all of it was what I thought a huge failure. I would spend every moment of free time fixing a problem or hiding crying my eyes out so I would be able to keep it together in public. It was very traumatizing. lol (I can laugh about it now.) Finally got to the end of the conference testimony mtg and I was having a really hard time keeping it together, all the failures of the conf were running through my mind. Then a thought, almost a voice, came into my mind and it said "It's my conference, it's my money and I'll do what I want with it. I don't define success the same as you." That's when I started listening to the testimonies instead of being distraught in my own thoughts. It was a success in spiritual terms. The speakers that needed to speak spoke, even if I didn't plan them. The small group worked out in a way I could have never planned. Even the issues with the conference room worked out for good. I was too busy being depressed to see it, everyone else had a great time and was spiritually lifted. I lost sight of what my part was. Things never work when we try to control the Lord's part. I love Michael McLean's song Which Part Is Mine, it's a good reminder of this.

I'm currently reading The Gift of Giving Life - skipping most of the birth stories for personal reasons. It's really good and I recommend it. Not to push you to decide that you should or shouldn't, just a unique spiritual perspective. Maybe give you some balance and something to think on as you pray about what is the right decision for you and your family. It's not a book for first time moms only. I'm discovering a lot and I'm going on #6. lol

The barney one I recall hearing back in the mid 90's I guess it was (or some other variations of it). I never cared for Barney but never hated him. I think in some ways it was just cool to hate him. I recall my nieces and nephews singing songs and I'd join them and they would be very surprised "you know barney songs?!" "no, that song was around long before barney." lol The joy to the world one was about the same time but always sung about the teacher at the end of the school yr. I never found it funny but some classmates sure did. Another I recall from that time frame (now that you have me reminiscing lol). roll roll roll your joint lick it at the end huff puff that's enough pass it to a friend Fortunately my kids have not been singing any of these. They do sing the jingle bells batman smells and the k-i-s-s-i-n-g one. My 9 yr old thinks it's hysterical to sing "mommy and daddy sittin' in a tree..." lol

The instruction I was given was that no one can interpret the instruction but you and the lord. Go to the temple and do some proxy work where you get the garment, talk to the bishop and listen to the paragraph they always read when you get your temple recommend. After listening closely and praying about it no one can tell you (even the bishop) if you are wearing the garment correctly. If you can stand before the lord and say you feel you have kept your covenant then that is all that matters. Even in the temple interview they don't get into specifics. They read a paragraph about the covenant and then ask if you are wearing your garments as covenanted. You answer yes or no. If you want to change due to the clothing not being modest then I'd say it may not be a good idea. If your clothes are still modest and it's a rare occasion that you are running off after dinner for a romantic location then I'm not sure I see it as any worse than prolonging the intimacy by sleeping the rest of the night after naked instead of jumping up and getting dressed asap. The counsel is that intimacy is for more than procreation. Unfortunately no one can answer this question for you but you. Pray, pray, pray.

I have in-laws that sometimes take things too far in my opinion (not quite as bad as you describe). I don't make a lot of dramatics, I simply change what I do in relation to it. It's taken time but they are slowly changing. lol When they did things I had expressed not being ok with then I pull back without causing a scene. The visit is over or I refuse to let anyone else hold my baby or watch my kids. They will figure out that being inappropriate limits their access without you saying anything if you don't want to make a direct confrontation (just know it takes a lot more time that way). The wanting to watch porn comment, just calmly take your baby and go for a walk. The boobs comment I would have taken my baby, left the room and started packing my things and bid them goodbye. Give whatever reason you want but they will learn their behavior isn't working. ("I don't feel well" is a great reason. It's not a lie, their comments make you sick, but it's also non confrontational.) You can't tell them how to be in their home but you can refuse to be in their home. You can tell them how to be in your home and if they don't then they aren't invited to later events. Ppl will eventually learn that's "just how you are". Like most know you don't walk up to me and say "give me that baby" while taking him. You ask and I might just say "not now, thank you". lol Sit down with your husband and decide where the lines are and how you will handle crossing those lines. If needs be come up with a code phrase or signal that you can say to each other meaning we need to leave asap. Doesn't matter why, you can talk about that later, just the code to start politely making the exit.

My stake pres recently told me that he was presented with a request that was very out of the norm. The handbook even had instructions against it. But no matter how much he prayed and pondered he felt he should give the request made. He ended up calling the area authority for advice (he is a pretty new stake pres). The counsel he was given was that the church is here to support the family, everything about the gospel is designed to bring the family closer to god. He was told to pray about it and decide if giving this request would support this family in coming closer to god and if denying it would somehow push them away. When he knew that answer he would know what to do, make your decision and stand by it. He ended up giving this family their request. I have seen ppl get records moved because they didn't like the bishop. I have seen ppl get records moved over location (closer to the other unit). I have seen records moved due to custody agreements from divorce (records in a location the child didn't live). I've seen records moved for all kinds of reasons. For the record I think if you can you should go to your assigned ward. You should support your area and build the kingdom where you are. I think moving records because you don't like the bishop is for the most part probably foolish. However, that is between the person and their leadership. I think what was described in the op is a valid reason, it supports the family in coming closer to god. Unless there is prayer and direct revelation otherwise then no big deal. If the request is denied then I would give the new ward a chance, see if the lord has something for you there before resigning yourself to perpetual visitor status. (off on a side note, I used to have this horrible dream about my husband's ex father in law being called to come down and be our branch pres and I was trying to get our records moved without much luck. ahhhhhh lol)

My only point is the fact that there is no prohibition should be irrelevant. I can understanding asking why, out of curiosity if nothing else but to preface that with the lack of prohibition seemed judgmental to me. Sorry if I misunderstood the tone. There are no prohibitions on a lot of things and yet we should be doing them out of the spirit of the law. There is guidance against some things and yet ppl seem to flaunt that they do it. We all have to make certain decisions. We shouldn't need earth moving reasons to listen to promptings from god as to what is right for our family. I totally understand boundaries and you have to draw the line somewhere but sometimes I really don't think much thought went into it. The only time I've seen when one side of the street is in one ward and the other in a different ward was when they met in the same building just at different times. I don't see making someone drive across town when there is a building 2 blocks away... that was the only place to draw the line? Our stake has always confused me. Our stake ctr is not centrally located, it's at the top edge of our stake. Which means those at the south edge of the stake have to drive 2 or more hrs for meetings. It also means the stake ctr for the next stake over is only 10 min from ours. That confuses me. As a result many of our stake mtgs take place at the ward building that is centrally located instead of the stake ctr (which is a very considerate accommodation done by our stake). If you become a frequent visitor to the closer ward just keep in mind that you will need to attend the assigned ward enough to pay tithing, get the necessary interviews, etc. It will make holding callings difficult. But I've seen that done as well.

Personal thoughts on valid reasons why one would not drive to church when they can walk...... With gas prices going up I could see not driving on certain days to keep in the budget. I know some that walk because they find the morning walk helps to take them away from everyday things and prepare for the meetings. It's part of their spiritual preparation. That short slow walk as a family may be the only exercise his wife can handle while in recovery. If he's not home to go with her then they don't go. Maybe the walk to church helps the kids get the wiggles out so they can be reverent at church. Maybe one of them has serious road rage and they would like at least one day of the week to not have to repent of saying/thinking something ugly (especially on the way to church) or a day where they can let their brain rest from the constant need to control it. Maybe it was just a tradition that one of them had growing up and they want to keep doing it. Or they started out walking as newlyweds and found it improved things for them so they kept up even after kids. In the end it doesn't matter why they walk. That's what their family does. Even not walking I would be inclined to object over the boundaries as well. I'm saying this as someone that moved from 1 mi from church to about 12 mi from church. It has been one of our biggest adjustments. Talk to the bishop. I know several ppl that have attended outside of their boundaries. It will probably have to go to the stake for final decision but the bishop will know where to start. The only reason I could see it being a big deal is if one of the units is very small and they need the priesthood support. But if both are wards I can't see where it should be an issue.

She missed a perfectly good missionary opportunity....... He opened the door for a great pre-existence discussion.

Is it possible for someone to be confused as a teen? yes, in fact it's quite common. Will that person eventually figure out what is their personal truth? yup, that happens too. I agree it's sad when a youth is pushed into experimenting sexually by our culture. The goal is to teach kids the standards they should live by no matter their attractions at that point. If they can avoid making mistakes (like sexual sins) as a teen by the time they are ready to have a healthy sexual relationship they will know what their attractions are. I too worry about the impact of culture on teens and their sexuality. But I think the greater focus needs to be on the promiscuity aspect of it, no matter the sexual preference.

So a 15 yr old boy that wants a girlfriend is not a hetrosexual? If one can be a hetrosexual then one can be a homosexual. I chose to marry a man because I knew before I had sex that I was hetrosexual (I knew this as a teenager). The actions do not define the attraction. Why is that so hard to comprehend in reverse? I don't understand what is so hard to understand about definitions. It's like talking to my 9 yr old who wants to call the bb gun a shotgun. Well you can call it that but no one will know what you are talking about. If you want to communicate and understand and be understood you have to use the words the rest of the world uses. The same is true for my learning disabilities. I don't consider myself disabled. I consider it a learning difference but guess what.. if I want accommodations and to be understood in the world I have to call it a disability. Homosexual is not a verb, it's an adjective to describe ones sexaul attractions. Gay is the common accepted alternative to homosexual. So one can describe himself/herself as gay and not be sexualy active. Homosexual sex is an action. Hetrosexual ppl can engage in homosexual sex and they are not gay. Gay ppl can have hetrosexual sex and it doesn't change that they have homosexual desires. One can act contrary to their natural desires/attractions. It's not usually viewed as healthy but they can. The church stance is against actions. Sexual relations outside of marriage. It's pretty cut and dry. So someone can be gay, meaning homosexual attractions, and be living the law of chastity. If someone tells you they are gay and you automatically assume that means they are saying they are sexualy active then you are doing them and yourself a huge disservice. It's like calling a bb gun a shotgun. All communication breaks down. They shouldn't have to prove they are gay by acting on it anymore than single ppl should have to prove they are straight by acting on it. That would defeat the point of the law of chastity.

I would like to point out that when I was in 9th grade (around 14yrs) I was introduced to all kinds of sexual "education" that I'm sure my parents would have prefered I not know at that time by hetrosexual peers at school. The few ppl that I knew that were gay talked very little about it. I heard more sexual talk about them than from them. Why we assume it's only the gay kids that will inappropriately "educate" our kids I will never understand. Odds are if there is a bunch of sex talk in the tent before going to sleep it's among the straight kids not the gay ones. We can never share the gospel and do missionary work if we refuse to leave our church box.

newbirth, I assume you homeschool your kids? The church stance is that the attraction is no more a sin than that of any hetrosexual attraction. It's a natural biological function. One of the purposes of the law of chastity is to learn to be in control of our bodies and be accountable for how we act on that attraction. So if a homosexual person is living the standards of the church (law of chastity included) then they can do and progress in the church just the same as a single hetrosexual person that is living the standards of the church (law of chastity included). That means they can hold callings, the priesthood, go on missions, attend the temple, etc. So Soul is correct the BSA is now in line with the church. or in the words of the church....... Church Responds to Boy Scouts Policy VoteI think we miss what the word "open" means. It does not mean in your face, sexually active, yell it from the rooftops gay. It means they can admit it to those they determine safe and it be ok. They can tell their priesthood or scout leaders without fear of being punished for something they didn't do (sexual relations outside of marriage). This is a good thing. All the things ppl are talking about fearing will actually reduce. The difference is you might know about it now. For example one of the big concerns expressed was "will this gay boy be checking out my sons when changing or in the showers". If he's having to hide the fact that he's gay then odds are yes he will be. If he can safely tell his leaders that he's gay then they can assist him in the accommodations he needs to avoid temptation, like private shower time. Another is sharing a tent with someone they are attracted to. Again if they are hiding the fact then there is a chance that he just might end up doing that. Presenting the boy with temptations of impure thoughts that will make it very hard for him to remain true to his standards when he has no support. If he can confide in his leaders without fear of discrimination then he can say "I'd really prefer not to share a tent with ....." Reducing the stress for him and the other ym. This "open" policy is a good thing. It allows the reality of what is already going on to be addressed and accommodated without discrimination. It allows the person to finally get some support in their desire to remain chaste. It will help more be true to their testimony instead of feeling alone and hopeless and giving up to what the world says they should be as a gay person. Isn't that the idea behind the gospel? Shouldn't we be supporting each other in our trials and helping each other to remain true? How can we do that if they must hide what their trial is?