dirtydevil

so do you think that the LDS general authorities are unified in their opinions on whether gay marriage should be legal, or do you think they have conflicting opinions like other LDS members? Muslims for Progressive Values support transexuals rights too. Not all of us agree with their behavior, but we believe in allowing them the legal right to continue in their lifestyle if they wish. Muslims are very diverse, just as diverse as christianity.

sounds like Doterra or Young Living Essentials. My brother and his wife are in huge debt over it, fileing bankruptcy and loosing a half million dollar home in Eagle Mountain. It has also really hurt his relationship with me, my siblings, my parents. His marriage is on the rocks, and I feel sorry for his 5 children.

I dont know if this is the case. I just heard it from the rumor mill. But I found this case. it isnt recent. it is from 2010. Mormons Found Guilty on 13 Counts of Prop 8 Malfeasance, Fined by FPPC | California Progress Report "[The fine] seems a little light since [the FPPC] only looked at $36,000 of their contributions, but it's also historic because no church has ever been fined for illegal political activity in California before," said Fred Karger, CAH founder. "In fact, it's unprecedented." "it was eventually learned that the Mormon Church coordinated contributions amounting to more than half of the $45 million dollar Yes on Prop 8 campaign, as well as contributing non-monetarily to the campaign by sending Mormon campaign volunteers through the Church's "mission" program and offering use of church ward (parish) properties throughout the state."

looking for info on it online.

It sounds like the beliefs among mormons are not as unified as I had previously assumed. I guess it is a diverse group, maybe not as diverse as muslims, because of their small size and controls, but diverse none the less.

I left the church. Now I am affiliated with the organization "Muslims for Progressive Values" we promote legalized ssm among muslims too. I am here because of my LDS background. Some of us have been very vocal, and a few in our organization have even been jailed in Egypt for supporting ssm. We are UN sponsored organization.

"Well, the most important point there I can make is, I am not a member of the LDS church." "Uh... I find this interesting that not everyone on lds.net is LDS. If you would notice, each poster shows their religious preference. For example, yours says "muslim". Lakumi says "other". oops, somebody face-palm me.

But is this reasoning that the most blessing be made available by god to a complete family justification for the LDS church (through its media front organizations) and anyone else to advocate that ssm be illegal? The LDS church was recently successfully sued over this.

"I fully support gay marriage" I do find this interesting because I believe that the LDS church advocates against legalized ssm. I believe that the church was recently successfully sued for interferrance in political matters in their attempt to keep ssm illegal. How do you justify supporting a legal matter that the church is against. It would seem to me that you would have faith they they are correct in this ambition, instead.

"Not only does it have nothing to do with my post, but I fully support gay marriage I also live in Canada, not the US" I am sorry. I assumed that you were a stateside conservative. I find that some will say things like, "If you dont like the law here, then leave". Canada being one of those destination because the see it as a liberal bastian. My apologies.

"Your response had nothing to do with Lakumi's post. Why don't you just come out over what's really bothering you?" attempted character assasination and presumption? I am engaging in moral advocacy through logical argument.

If nobody here cares if single people (gay or straight) adopt, even though the adopted child would be missing out on a parent of the opposite sex of their adopted parents, then why is a child missing out of a parent of a particular sex the primary argument against the legalization of same sex marriage by the LDS?? Do you see the connection now? You are trying to do a character assasination of me when you should not be. If you had a logical argument to defend your LDS stance against ssm, then you would not engage in a last resort character assasination in stating that I appear to be out to attack you as apposed to bringing forth an argument for moral advocacy.

"in Canada they can legally marry..." most of the population of the US lives in states where gays can legally marry, as well. What is your point? People are free to advocate for ssm wherever they live here, where their lived ones are. Are you saying that a same sex couple should leave their beloved family and friends and move to Canada for marriage instead of vexing you with their advocacy and logical arguments? Apparently you want freedom of speech, you just dont want people to take advantage of it where you live, if you disagree with their views.

and yet, if we we conclude that it is logical that a single women should still be able to legally adopt (even though a father figure wil not be provided) , then why should it be logical for lesbian women who may even already have children to not be legally with wed (with associated family legal protections) because there would not be a father figure for present or future children? Maybe we should then advocate for illegalizing adoption for all single adults, gay or straight (sarcasm)

And, if a single straight LDS woman should not adopt because marriage is not an option for her (say because of disfigurement, or some other reason) because she would be less affective at raising a child (being single), then, should we advocate that it should be illegal for her to adopt as well because she is single

the unmarried LDS same sex couple doesnt neccesarily have to be living together, just as most unmarried LDS opposite sex couples dont live together. What if they decide they want to adopt? A straight man's girlfriend could decide to adopt. An unwed gay LDS couple adopting makes sense as a likely scenario because the homosexual couple cant get married for legal and religious reasons. Also, should straight LDS singles not adopt if marriage is not an option for them for whatever reason?

I was curious if the church has taken a stance on this. Say, a single gay man or lesbian women wanted to adopt a baby? Or a gay couple who want to adopt, while limiting their intimacy to within the bounds that the church has set for unwed persons? Would the church look approvingly on this? Or should it be something that mormons should advocate against to make it illegal, like with same sex marriage?

women have problems with pornography too. many women even make porn believe it or not! They just wont admit it to their male bishop who they dont really know.

i imagine not having church responsibilities allows the nonmember spouse to spend more time with their family.

If they give you comfort then they are fulfilling their purpose. We pray for us, not for God. God does not need our gratitude and praise, but we need to give it to let us know our standing before God, as it humbles us, which makes us better people, then we find more peace.

so maybe one day to God is a 1000^3 years to man :)

I hardly know anything about quantum physics, but I have a hypothesis about energy, spirit matter and the such. I see all of the detectible "matter" aka "energy" actually existing as bubbles within an omnipresent substrate (maybe dark energy?) These bubbles may be what we know as basic quantum particles. They have surface tension, can spin at different rates affecting their charge and the way they interact, and there may exist different kinds of bubbles with varying degrees of false vacuums like anti-bubbles (think oil drops in water that are surrounded by air as a model). Their movement and the way they interact with each other is what we know as energy. These interacting bubbles make up the universe or universes. Each universe in the shape of a torus which constantly recycles itself. The "material" eminates as shockwaves from its central apex, and expands outward in a spiral fashion on the surface of the torus. At the present time, we are being being expelled toward the top of this donut shaped torus, which is why the universe appears to be expanding exponentially faster. Eventually we may take our course around the surface of our torus universe and be recycled back into the inner apex. The apex may be where the "Big Bang" pulsations regularly occur. The omnipresent substrate in which our universe resides in, and which resides in our universe, could be considered "god" or "spirit" from a panentheistic viewpoint. Maybe it is its own mind somehow, and set the laws that govern everything within its essence. When one pushes against its laws they might become "out of tune", experiance entropy, and suffer until their efforts are eventually weakened and overcome in the distant future. some links to a few things in my hypothesis: Doughnut theory of the universe - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia False vacuum - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=torus%20universe&sm=3 Quantum foam - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia unification, spacetime foam, quantum vacuum, quantum fluctuations

How does these scientific advances prove your religion over that of lets say... a humanist that is agnostic or atheistic. Note that you dont need to beleive in a deity in order to beleive in a first cause to the universe, or lack thereof.

I havent read ken wilbur

Possibilities....oops