Quin

"Finally, another small correction: Despite what was reported, the Church revelation spelling out health practices (Doctrine and Covenants 89) does not mention the use of caffeine. The Church’s health guidelines prohibit alcoholic drinks, smoking or chewing of tobacco, and “hot drinks” — taught by Church leaders to refer specifically to tea and coffee. *" Mormonism in the News: Getting It Right | August 29 .... Although, just so you know, many -if not most- root beers have caffeine in them. Barqs, for example, is pretty on par with coke or mtn dew. Some brands don't (a&aw used to make a caffeine free version... Don't know if they still do or not, mugg I *believe* is caffeine free -but I don't like it, so don't know for sure-) Ahem. And CHOCOLATE has caffeine in it. Q

I would pay every cent I ever earned, live on the streets, live naked on the streets, cut off my arm or leg (or both) if it meant my kids never had to see their abusive father /my ex-husband, ever, ever again. None of this is exaggeration. I've also debated running &/or just killing him. Since I'm talking about those things, clearly I'm not planning on either, although the next trip to the ER because my daughter tries to kill herself at his house, or he leaves more bruises around my son's neck, and I may change my mind. I envy you. So, 2 mortal sins in 1 post, wish I had what you do. Or rather, didn't have what you don't. Q

For the record... I SUPPORT the church's stance on marriage. I also VOTE for marriage equality. Because I believe that all people should be equal under the law. Whenever one group is denied he same rights & responsibilities as everyone else... Or is dehumanized / doesn't "deserve" the same rights as others... Even if I do not agree with the group, I vote for ALL of us having the same rights. Equal unto the law. Not men only. Not white men and women only. Not everyone but Jews. Not everyone but gay people. Not everyone but redheads, or everyone but homeless, or everyone but wealthy people, or everyone but ... No buts. ALL of us having the same legal rights and responsibilities. If a person is a legal consenting adult, I believe FIRMLY that my government should treat them the same under the law as every other legal consenting adult. MY church can recognize as holy matrimony something entirely different than my friend's churns, mosque, or temple. I love that. I love that I am free to follow MY church's dictates. (I've lived in countries where that is not true. It is a precious gift.) I cannot deny that religious freedom to others. So while I support MY church's view on holy matrimony, I do not support the government saying a white woman cannot marry a black man. Wait. ANY kind of judicial discrimination. Q

The subject of marriage is completely different than someone's sexual identity. Heterosexual people go through life and never get married. That doesn't change their sexual orientation or identity. Ditto homosexual. When someone says "homosexual" and someone else replies with "child & dog rapers" ... That is a direct verbal assault. The same way if someone says Quinn, or Finnrock... And someone else says "child & dog raper", or someone says woman and someone else says fat lazy cow. Taking aside all the homosexual people outside the church... Let's JUST look at all the homosexual people INSIDE the church. Those following the law of chastity along with every other covenant they've ever made... But then a member of the church calls them or equates them with (by inference, or straight out, the hateful intent is clear) someone who rapes children or animals. NOT ONLY THAT... But then the vast majority either agree with the sentiment, or remain silent. I could have told you of 2 members in my ward (that are open about their SSA), and gone on for days, as they're wonderful people. One fairly young, one who fought in WWII. Both committed to following the church despite the HORRIBLE treatment of them by other members. I could have told you about my pal who is in a mixed orientation marriage, as they believe so strongly in the gospel AND want a family. I could have told stories about many many of my friends outside the church. But Vort equated these GOOD PEOPLE with the worst kind of evil. And, sickenly, others followed suit. The church is vey clear on its position about marriage. The church is ALSO very clear that homosexual people are to be treated with love & understanding. Calling someone a pedophile is NOT treating them with love and understanding. Nor, IMHO, is justifying all bad treatment of homosexuals based on the separate issue of marriage. Q

LOL... Oh vey! The fun of getting older. First off... 30 (ish) is when "this" tends to happen for the first time. Meaning the first time you're attracted to someone waaaaaay too young. Because they're adults. But... But... Yeah. They're too young. Doesn't mean that you can't still appreciate a fine mind, good heart, and great spirit (not to mention physical attractions). You will still, most likely, appreciate those things in 20yos when you're 80. Not all of them, clearly, but it will happen. In this case, it's a double whammy, because not only are they too young, they're also on Mission. Which is sacred / inviolate. And even if you were 25, acting on those impulses would be a violation. Professors have this issue as a job hazard. The disparate position level in their case actually makes romantic liaisons with undergrads illegal &/or fire able. Doesn't mean they never feel anything. They're just expected to exercise self control. So, too, remember that a lot of this is the forbidden aspect. Not that you wouldn't feel he same way if they weren't forbidden. But that when a thing is forbidden we tend to RELAX. We're not trying to put our best self forwards. We act differently than we would in a meat market. Because it's safe to. Be ourselves. And then, completely not looking for it, attraction pops up and smacks us in the face. Drats. And hey like me for me. Not the me pretending not to be crazy. Double Drats. Well. Time to be the grown up. En guard. Which is my last piece of advice: Consider, when these things crop up (and they will) - While you're single, use them as a learning experience. Something to add to your template in what you would want in a spouse. Whatever it is that makes Too-Young-Bloke attractive. My grandmother is hilarious this way, as she started saying those traits out loud the last 20 years of her life. "I always liked cocky young men! I always liked a man I could just sit with and not have to talk and talk to fill up the silence." Yeah. This WILL keep happening. - While married, for every one thing you find yourself liking about dude-not-your-husband find 5 things you like about your spouse. Sorry, sister. Getting older takes nerves of steel. Q

Long before becoming LDS / aka no law of chastity... I've had regrettable sex. Or gone too far with someone that I shouldn't, when it doesn't even progress that far, but it was too far, anyway. I've also been raped. There is an ENOURMOUS difference. A yes I regretted, versus no. Convinced, versus forced. It's clear you regret this encounter, however far it went. But from what you've written, it sounds like you were convinced. Not forced. If so...then was it an abuse of your friendship? Maybe. I don't know his side. From some standpoints (no matter how much you regret it), you may actually be considered to have taken advantage of him.... Since he's a vulnerable population (both treated & untreated mental illness sometimes means the person is not cogent enough to give consent. Like being drunk. In many states, Maine for example, a person is not legally able to give consent if drunk because of impaired agency. Same thing with many forms of mental illness. Bipolar disorder in a mixed episode or psychosis counts). From other standpoints, you could both have been participating members who may both regret, or only 1 regret... Or you could have been ill used for your body. I don't know. There's a lot of variables. I just know that back before I observed the law of chastity, all 4 situations came up on a fairly regular basis. It was shocking, the first time I realized at instead of being ill used, he'd actually felt the same by me. Similarly, encounters I thought were truly lovely, they felt hurt and angry afterward / felt used by me. Ouch. I bring these up, not meaning to lessen or increase how badly you clearly feel about what happened between you and this young man, but because all the twisted routes people are hurt by physical affection are commonly known/discussed by those who don't have the law of chastity. Because they all happen. Period. People get hurt. I do urge you to seriously consider the difference: If you were raped, you were raped. It's not your fault, and please please seek help. If you had regrettable sex (or however far you went), own your piece of it, learn from it, and go see your bishop. Q

I'm not insinuating anything. Gay bashing is intolerable. Any kind of racist, sexist, anti-religionist, etc. bashing & bigotry is intolerable. Homosexuality is not considered a sin in the LDS Church. The LDS Church is pretty clear in its directive on how homosexual people are to be treated : which is the opposite of what many members are doing. Including on here. How is any of this inaccurate? Q

ALL of my GLBTQ friends & loved ones are amazing. So are my straight friends and loved ones. So are my: Single, married, black, white, Christian, Jewish, male, female, liberal, conservative, military, pacifist, steak eating, vegan friends... They're all utterly amazing people. It's a basic requirement for my friendship: awesomeness. ((PS, I answered the various q's from earlier as to why I don't tolerate people being bigots towards ANY group of my friends or loved one on the thread jack post. In summation: part of my appreciating them means standing up for them, in person or alone...when people I like, or strangers, start abasing them. Regardless of how unpopular their group might be at the moment. Any further comments I'll answer over there.)) Q

Shockingly, not too subtle. What's the point a mother's appreciation thread? When are we going to have a fat lazy cow appreciation thread? Gee. The inference just goes completely over my head. No, wait, it doesn't exist! Roll. Eyes. Which IS me spouting off. And it's how I show my appreciation. By not tolerating hateful and divisive language that dehumanizes and insults entire groups of people, be it racist, sexist, antisemetic, misogynistic, or any other hateful ism. Anything that wants to declare a person to be 3/5ths of a "real" person, deny the same treatment under the law as everyone else, or compares them to animals and criminals (or make them criminals) just because they're different from the majority OR different from their own religious beliefs. I'm not a slut because I don't cover my hair, even if someone else's religion says I am. Nor your wife, nor your daughters, sisters, mother. Heck, MY religion doesn't even say that homosexuality is a sin, but because you & others don't like it, you compare them to people raping dogs, and beating their wives. What? Because they're black? Or Jewish? Or don't cover their hair? Or... Wait... What's that group that's okay to hate right now? Oh. Right. Hate-group-du-jour. EACH and every single time someone makes a hateful comment about someone's race, religion, sexuality... Whatever. I. Do. Not. Let. That. Stand. Regardless of how much I might like the person in all other ways, when they choose to abase an entire group of people, they are wrong. And I would be just as wrong to say nothing and let them do it. It's wrong, unchristlike, and moreover directly against instruction given to us who are LDS from our leaders to love, NOT mock, ridicule, or attack gay people....Just in case this is too subtle for you ... "With love and understanding, the Church reaches out to all God’s children, including our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters." Mormons and Gays Q

As a child I told myself I would have fought the Nazi's and marched with Dr. King. As an adult, I can do no less. And WHEN did it okay on this forum to call people swine, coons, or dog rapers to marginalize their humanity??? Q

I'd be really surprised to find out that the church has a stance, since the difference between transgender & transsexual is so incredibly misunderstood outside of the trans community. Even in the LGBTQA community it's often misunderstood. Add in all the variables (like many places requiring a year of transgender living prior to any surgical intervention, and male transgender still dating/attracted to women v male transgender dating/attracted to men, and don't get me started on the bi-crowd, or asexual, or drag, or transvestite) and things get reeeeeally murky. I know the one place where you WILL run into problems regardless of male to female, or female to male... Is holding the priesthood. As in women do not. Which branches into where would you go on Sundays... Priesthood or Relief Society... Means probably the nursery, or home & not fully participating unless you got approval from on high. Right? Q

Oy. I have worked so many wildly disparate jobs over the past 20 years, in wildly different fields... That I think the only thing I can say is Occupation : Yes. Usually. Often several at once. Or Robin Williams it up "I. Am. Job." I really envy people who seemed to just know who/what they wanted to be in life and just DID that, you know? They have these gorgeous sinuous lines that look like school, college, carreer, family that equates to doctor, lawyer, graphic designer, circus performer, teacher, SAHP, actor, engineer, etc. My life has meant a lot of 180s as I adapt to changing circumstance. It's not that I have problems keeping a job or finding work... It's more taking advantage of a really interesting opportunity as it presents itself, which leads to the next totally interesting thing until circumstance changes (can't raise kids in a 3rd world slum! Okay, quit that job. Can't be a SAHM after divorce when broke! Time to find a new job!). All of which makes my CV look like it has Epilepsy. Q

Then there's also that horrible truth that most offenders were unsupported victims to begin with. I think, as a nation, we're slowly getting better with prevention (youth outreach is woefully underfunded and sparse, but at least it exists in some places). And we're slowly getting better with rehabilitation (I feel that griping about that to you might be preaching to the choir)... But I think we're still pretty clueless about what to do in that middle step. AFTER someone has been victimized, they're far more likely to turn to substance abuse or crime. But, both as churches and a nation, we pretty much leave victims twisting in the wind. Or even shove them down the wrong path. While they still need help, we can't/won't do anything for them. They have to buy a gun and posse up, get arrested shooting dope or DUI, attempt suicide, etc. before there are any resources for them. Q

LOL. I got totally mistaken for LDS because of this! Back when I wasn't. Granted, I was in Utah, visiting LDS friends... So the assumption was pretty natural. But the arguments when my friend and I said I wasn't LDS were pretty hilarious. "But you LOOK mormon/LDS" was always somewhere in them. Scrubbed cheek, healthy, enthusiastic, friendly, talks to strangers, works hard, helps others, clean spoken, talks to God like you're talking to a friend translates into many faiths. Including no organized religion (which was where I was, completely unaffiliated and cheerfully determined to stay that way). Mormons tend to do the glow thing Catholics tend to be a bit gritty (determined, pugnacious) Quakers reserved Evangelists energetic Baptists forward Etc. It's one of the things I really like about the "I'm a Mormon" campaign. The church, I feel, does a really great job of showing that ALL kinds of people belong to the church. Not just our stereotype of pink cheeked enthusiasm / extroverts. We've also got gritty, reserved, energetic, forward, introverted, and every other kind of person in our meeting halls, ya know? LOL... I always flash to "the news from lake woebegone" when our stereotypes come into play. "Where the women are strong, the men are good looking, and all the children are above average." Q

I know of some churches who do. Just like for the perpetrators they provide - Housing &/or relocation services - Counseling - Employment assistance - Financial assistance - Education assistance - Legal assistance (both in convicting their assailant... AND make sure that the victim never, ever, ever has to spend even one moment of their time with their rapist, attacker, abuser, etc. ...and then later in changing their identity so they can live their lives in peace, without fearing their assailant tracking them down to terrorize them further.) But most don't. Most only provide assistance to the sinner and tell the victim to get over it. Wait. "Forgive". Same difference, really. Most churches add insult to injury to victims of violent crimes. Threatening them with hell & condemnation if they don't forgive their attackers, while doing nothing whatsoever to help them become strong and independent people after what is often years of devastating pain. It's as nonsensical as telling a criminal to "stop". But that's the way the pendulum swings. One of these days, we'll get it right, and help both instead of only one or the other. Q

OP... Consider these as well: 1) You have set your wife into an impossible position. You want her past utterly erased from your view, and are also mad that she hasn't shared everything with you. That doesn't work. I've dated a lot, so that IS something I've learned to ask new boyfriends: What do you want to know about my past? Some want to know everything. Some want to know nothing. And in between, some want to know generalities but not specifics, or are fine talking about their exes but not me mine, or vice versa I can talk all day about my exes but they don't want to talk about theirs. There is an infinite number of ways in which people approach the past. I RESPECT their wishes (or broke up with them). Meaning if I was dating a guy who didn't want to hear about my exes, I didn't talk about them. If said guy then got mad at me for - not talking about them or - friends who are not in our relationship not following OUR rules (happens) Then things got dicey. Because those are both impossible standards. I can't tell nothing and everything, nor can I make other people behave the way he wAnts ME to behave. See what I mean? Emotions aren't rational... So you're going to have to think this thing through, as you CANNOT have it both ways. 1.5) Also... She appears to have followed your rules. She told you the truth, in a way that you were comfortable with (sounds like you were/are fine with generalities, not specifics) . Then YOU broke your own rules... By reading her journals... And are now mad at her for knowing all the gory details. Doubly mad, for her respecting your wishes, and not telling you all the gory details. Although, conversely, if SHE was the one who is only fine with generalities and not details, then you just participated in a major breach of trust. ((Ahem. Why does this all sound like your fault? Because she hasn't lied to you. Nor has she asked you to do anything you were uncomfortable with. To the contrary, it sounds like she's bent over backwards to accommodate & respect you. She didn't invite dear or old friends to her wedding, she's not allowed to be alone/trusted around men she's dated, she's not allowed to associate with friends who may be indiscreet about her past. Yet, no matter what, you're still mad at her. She can't "win", and cannot make you happy... Because you want 2 opposing things from her.)) 2) People's brains work differently. Some people COULD just keep their pasts in their head, and never really think of it. Others keep the past in their minds and think on it constantly (until writing it down, so they're no longer reviewing it mentally). Some people write the past down, in order to remember it, as they'd forget otherwise Other people write the past down, and never really think of it. There are four examples... But there are really dozens of ways in which minds and memories function. There is NO ONE WAY. You want your wife's mind to work like yours. It doesn't. As evidenced by her telling you how her mind works, and you not believing her, because that's not the way your mind works. You want her to show you respect, but that really needs to be a 2 way street. She can't tell you to write everything down and keep them so that you won't obsess over it, if you obsess over things you write down & keep... And you can't tell her to burn all of her writings so that she doesn't obsess over them, if destroying them would CAUSE her to obsess over them. 2 different people. 2 different brains. A person can change their mind. A person cannot change their brain. Just like a person can change the way they act in the present, but cannot change their past. Your memory functions one way, hers functions another. It's another impossible position you're placing her in... As she can't change her brain to function the way that yours does. She just can't. Q

It will be scary until you do it. Then it will be painful. It's just the way it is. No matter how good, or how necessary. A lot like childbirth. It's scary till you've done it, it hurts as you do it, and life is different after. I was married for over 10 years. It was abusive: divorce was a good thing. A necessary thing. But it was scary and it was painful. Meet with an attorney. Action dispels fear. Not all of it, there will be fears from beginning to end. Expect them. Fear is not our minds way of saying a thing is wrong. Fear is our mind' sway of letting us know about danger. Pretty much all significant change = danger. The whole "evil you know better than the evil you don't" kind of thinking. So expect the fear, and move forward with the spirit. Godspeed. Q

My first calling required (roughly) 1 hour of my time, 5 times a year, bring your kids with you (RS Activites panel). There were over 30 women on the panel, and we got schtuff DONE. My second calling would have been 10+ hours a week (in scouting), during the middle of my work day, that I graciously declined Bishops usually do that; call you in and talk to you about whether you would be able to accept a calling, before placing it on you. As opposed to springing it on you on Sunday when asking for everyone to sustain something you're hearing about for the first time!! There's the Golden quote I'll paraphrase: callings can come from inspiration, desperation, or relation. Just because you're offered something, doesn't mean you have to accept it. Even if inspired, instead of desired, it may well function to let your bishop know something he otherwise wouldn't. Like that I was working 2 jobs to make ends meet & had crazy hours. He had no idea things were that tight. Resulting from that meeting : carpooling to scouts, LDS Family Services, & a few other odds and ends that ended up meaning the world to me and my family. So I'd say it was definitely an inspired calling. Inspired by the Quin is a close-mouthed martyr (I type to gripe, all y'all get my loquaciousness in spades, IRL people I'm actually fairly reserved with) who refuses to ask for help, and the Spirit was sick of me being such a pain. So stop fretting. Q

Nicotine = Stimulant Which means next time you DO start craving cigarettes to he point of actually smoking (or about to, but not the random Tuesday cravings, Kwim?)... Ring your Dr. up ... As your meds probably need tweaking. The craving being your body's way of trying to stay alive / climb out of a depression. If you were an ex-rock climber, or sex addict, or coffee fiend, or cutter... Then your body would be craving THOSE things (all stimulants) to boost out of a depression. So.... Next time... Instead of feeling unworthy : try seeing it as an early warning system. All my best, sweetheart: Q

History doesn't need me to make it. It seems to do just fine all by itself. Besides... Forcing school kids to memorize my full name just seems harsh. Q

I was open. He wasn't. He still treats our divorce as if it should be Meaning he clones my phone (waaaaaaaay too easy) & puts Keylogger viruses in emails he sends about custody issues so he can hack my accounts (grrrrr). I'm meeting more & more people with techy-ex's I met THREE this week in Seattle! (Ugh. Microsoft land. Go figure) Maybe someday the law will catch up. Whoops. Back on target: My parents (gazillion year marriage) are the same as my ex and I were when we were married (10+ years) She's open. He's not. Like my ex & I... My dad has security clearance... My mom doesn't. So his stuff has to be private / Ironkey'd, etc. so THEIR stuff is done through my mom's. Point being, that just because theirs an inequality in transparency doesn't mean the über-private person is a scum gurbling coprolite. Q.

For ME (cap'd me=personal viewpoint=random reminder brought to you by those with too much time on their hands tonight)... Gambling is predicated on loss. Whether that's lost time, wages, life, family, values, morals, etc. Meaning I'll cheerfully donate $ to my kids school, or the firefighter's gala, or whatever... And if my ticket comes with a thankyou gift, sweet. If not? It's money I'd cheerfully donate even if they didn't have a raffle. Meaning I'll gladly wager push-ups or schlepping to get the laundry, or cooking Mexican on Tuesdays for a month or whatever else that i would do anyway. What I won't do... Accept a bet or dare for anything I would NOT do. Like jump off a bridge, or not spend the week with my kids, or give someone cash (unless it was someone I could only give cash to in that fashion: I've fed some hungry friends that way!) To ME, the radio call is a no-brainer* ... As I lose nothing by calling, nor stand to lose anything. They have something to give away to their listeners. I'm listening. Therefore I qualify. * That happy little asterisk? If I STAND to lose something, it ceases to be a no brained, as it becomes truly gambling / risking the loss of one thing for the gain of another. If I'm calling while driving (risking my life & others), it would make me late for work, or picking up the kids, or in any other way cause me to lose face, time, or money... Then nada. But if a place I frequent wants to do a customer appreciation thing? Whether it's free lunch or a trip to Disneyland, or a concert gratis? Sho'nuff. No worries. Customer appreciation isn't gambling... Unless they ask you to put something up that you can lose in order to win it. It is, however, why I also do NOT invest in the stock market. At all. Ever. Only invest what you can afford to lose. The only higher staked game out there is Russian roulette. .02 Q

That's what people mean when they say choosing to love. Meaning love the verb/actions/commitments... Not love the feeling. The commitment + allowing space for love fled to return. The + is important... Because just staying miserable isnt choosing to love. Pits choosing to suffer. No one, that I know of, can control their feelings... Or dictate who they fall in love with. What people do is control their REACTION to their feelings. Like, just because Im mad, doesn't mean I take it out on others. Nor does it mean I let it consume me. Although I CAN do both. Ditto, with love (or any other emotion). Just because I feel something (or not), that doesn't control me. Unless I let it. Or don't know how to monitor & regulate. Been there. Done that! There's a GREAT quote (that I learned too late!) that goes like this: You can't choose who you fall in love with. You can choose who you marry. (Or You can choose how far you take it). Which is a pointed version of the ADHD mantra: Can't choose the 1st thought. Can choose the 2nd! (We ADHD people are often mid-leap before the first thought is over, poor impulse control, so learning to wait/add a 2nd thought... Is pretty key to our continued existence). Anyhow. Just clarification. I hope!

I guess Im a little confused.. You use the past tense when you say that you chose not to... But if you're 22 as I understand... Then it's actually that you're CHOOSING not to go. Since you still have a few years where you're eligible to go. Not saying that you should... Merely that the tone in what I'm reading says done deal. You WERE too XYZ, not enough ABC, etc. No recourse. No possible change. When it's not. It's an ongoing decision UNTIL the deadline passes. While its certainly more common to go at 18/19... The cutoff is 25. I'm sure we all know a handful, at least, who went to college or served in the military and THEN went on a mission. Again... I'm not saying whether you (or anyone) should or shouldn't go. It's just more of a dynamic thing than I think you are presenting. Most people change a great deal between 18-25. Just because a person isn't ready at 18, doesn't mean that 7 years later they'll still be in the same mental & emotional place. Q

I'm in the student loan corner. Period. Always**. Here's why: - Student debt is classified differently than other debt (a few thousand in credit card debt is worse than tens of thousands in student loans debt. Shorthand: Banks & financial institutions expect that doctors/lawyers/other highly paid professionals to be carrying up to 6 figures in student loan debt.)... So it doesn't mess up your credit rating, or slow down your respectability. - If you can pay it off over a long enough period of time... The interest is often at (or lower) than inflation. Making it interest free. - The sooner one graduates, the sooner one starts making better money*. To use totally made up job/numbers... 40k per year prior to graduation. 100k after graduatiom. Graduate 2 years sooner = an extra 120k. The asterisk is assuming better pay after graduation (unlike my social worker friends, who make more at Starbucks than in practice for the first 3 years. But I digress). Just do the math, and see if you add money to your family, or subtract it, by what your salary is post graduation. - something I forget. Argh. There's a 4th reason. It will come to me. Maybe. At 2am. ** Granted, if one can go entirely on grants and scholarships, or pay out of pocket... Awesome. But that sounds like neither you nor me. _______ Slightly off topic... Make sure he meets with Student Family Services! As part of the financial aid package, a childcare subsidy is usually included IF you schlep over and sign up for it (and ticked the box when applying for grants & loans). I was a SAHM... Didn't need daycare per se... BUT that subsidy totally paid for my son's (pricey!) Montessori preschool. As students there was no way we could have afforded to pay for preschool that cost more than our rent. Which is reason 4.5 (I WILL remember #4, darn it) for student loans... Childcare subsidies and other awesome family benefits are only part of the student aid package at most universities. Q