paracaidista508

You know...Monson joined the navy with a contract that released him 6 months after the war was over. That put him out of the Navy in approx. March of 46. He was still 18 or maybe even 19 yrs old. Single, didn't leave the states or do any combat time and then went to school. Married in Oct 1948. Plenty of tim to go ona mission. Nelson was in the relatively same boat. Didn't go into military till after ww2 and I think it wasn't until Korean war was up and running. I may be wrong on that. That said, WW2 was going on while he was in college and didn't go then. Waited till finished school to be an MD and then joined the Army. Plenty of time to go on a mission also but chose not to. Oftentimes people cite the fact the war got in the way. Well Nelson was the only one to go to war and it was long after he was an adult. Monson never left the country and I'm pretty sure did less than a year in uniform. No one to include myself has any problem with this, but for anyone to say they couldn't go on a mission because of ww2 is laughable. So who are these guys you are talking about??...well heres the quote: "...majority of pot-smoking, skirt-chasing, money-grubbing Mormon kids who justify their idleness with Nelson’s and Monson’s examples and then come to MormonHub.com kvetching about all those uppity Mormon girls who won’t give them the time of day because they aren’t RMs. Who exactly are you talking about? Have not seen anyone claim that resume here. As for respecting todays kids who join the military in lieu of a mission...that's not very mormonish of you. You are supposed to say it is a terrible option. The worst thing ever. In fact it is a selfish and lousy thing to do.

I recently inherited 30 lbs of 30 plus year old wheat. Each can I have opened, I just made sure it sprouted. If it did, it was still good as new. If it didn't sprout, throw it away. Every sample has sprouted so far.

The paragraph actually encompasses the entire idea and sums it up nicely... every member a missionary what it doesn’t say is every male 18 yrs old it is mandatory to serve a full time mission. In fact it explicitly states no one is subject to be compelled to do it on a full time basis. That I s not what we tell our kids though. They are told they have no option but to serve a full time mission. End of story.

Ok I'll play your game. Here is the whole quote: Yes, every man, woman, and child—every young person and every little boy and girl—should serve a mission. This does not mean that they must serve abroad or even be formally called and set apart as full-time missionaries It includes everyone. Unless you think everyone means all members except for 18 year old males.

Not interested in reading the book. That's why I'm on here. We have sources who memorize the minutia to regurgitate on a forum or sharpshoot the gospel doctrine teachers. As for being the same decision...Not even close. Don't go as a youth...get ripped a new one. Don't go as an adult....well no one really cares.

I bet what you are saying. Question is how are you so smart that you can basically say, " yea ignore this statement he made,but all the others apply?" So you are saying this statement is to be ignored? This does not mean that they must serve abroad or even be formally called and set apart as full-time missionaries. I think your mindset is a lot like many other mormons...If you don't serve a full time 2 yr mission as a male....your service doesn't count. This knowing the pres Kimbal himself says a full time gig isn't neccessary.

We are talking about 19 year olds here, not married adults who have significantly more freedom on a mission than the kiddos do. It is a completely different level of a decision to serve. I do wonder tbough how was he able to afford the mission with three kids and like two days under his belt in a career. Was he a church employee already?

I read close enough so the the one part everyone seems to leave out of these discussions come to find out. So to my point...serving a full time mission is not mandatory contrary to what nearly every lds person would either tell you or believe. Right from the mouth of pres kimball. You will never hear that part of his talk brought up in any church talk about missions. I have never heard it, but I have heard the other part a million times. Believe me I would have picked up on it.

My experience was of my family and bishop pretty much saying yea if you don't go you will pretty much be damaged goods. Those girls in the singles ward (these were a new thing back then) will not want to have anything to do with you. My family laid off of that one fairly quickly after I asked why my mom married my dad. He didn't go on a mission ....the bishop on the other hand. He constantly brought it up. After getting out of the military, I didn't have much difficulty getting dates in the singles ward. I did have one girl cut a date short though once she found out I didn't go on a mission . That was a fun drive back to her house. Ended up getting married in that ward. Temple, kids, kids married and gone on missions....terrible the way everything turned out and we are even still married. Oh got my eagle too. Funny how that one all of a sudden turned into a nothing burger..eagle used to be the big indicator of your future success. As for a stigma later.on in life...I can't say I have experienced that other than in discussions with people or on forums like this. I was actually called a "nominal mormon boy" by a member of this forum because I didn't serve a mission . I like that one, kinda cute moniker. I can say though that the informal raise your hand if you served a mission happens quite a bit. Interestingly nothing ever happens with the Information from the impromptu poll. I never understood why they do that, but it has happened in every ward I have been in. Doesn't really bug me other than it seems like a dumb survey to take without any follow up like....hey you back there that didn't go on a mission...what's your major malfunction...ha that would be pretty exciting.

Well thank you very much for referencing this talk given by pres Kimball. I went and read it. A few paragraphs later I found this: "Someone might also ask, “Should every young woman, should every father and mother, should every member of the Church serve a mission?” Again, the Lord has given the answer: Yes, every man, woman, and child—every young person and every little boy and girl—should serve a mission. This does not mean that they must serve abroad or even be formally called and set apart as full-time missionaries. But it does mean that each of us is responsible to bear witness of the gospel truths that we have been given. We all have relatives, neighbors, friends, and fellow workmen, and it is our responsibility to pass the truths of the gospel on to them, by example as well as by precept." https://www.lds.org/new-era/1981/05/president-kimball-speaks-out-on-being-a-missionary?lang=eng Funny how if one just reads the entire talk, they find out what the prophet really said as opposed to cherry picking a paragraph to support an agenda. I should have read this talk a long time ago. I have heard the quote you provide parroted ad infinitum, but never a mention of the follow on commentary. This is yet another classic example of one statement being turned into something completely different and then being held up as a commandment or some rule. Kinda like the caffeine statement some GA made over the pulpit years ago and all of a sudden Mormons can't drink coke and Pepsi. That one lasted over 30 years I believe until the church cleared that one up in 2012 with a , " uh yea that was never against our religion" statement in the news. Thanks again

Wish you were in my ward growing up. I got treated like the spawn of Satan for going in the army lol... Of course there was no war going on back then so I was not justified... now the fact there is a war it has now become an excuse not to serve in the military lol.

Ok so for the conditions... Both Monson and Nelson met that criteria. Dr lemon didn't qualify his statement so without that qualification...He is essentially calling those two selfish and lousy. As for the tumor guy. He has a legit reason. Did I say someone like that would not? Lastly the commandment part. So which prophet made it a Commandment (mandatory)for all worthy and phys able young men to serve a full time mission? If it is a commandment, not following it then results in what? We have 10 commandments which if we do not repent for breaking we do no get a temple recommend or even worse....much worse in many cases. As for not going on a mission? What? Nothing. Go ask your stake pres, bishop. Ask what happens to someone in a temple rec interview who says yea I didn't go on a mission because I didn't feel like it and I don't regret it. Ask what they would then do with a person who broke this commandment and is not repentant. You might even get a blank stare. I've been the one sitting across from my bishop and stake pres right after getting out of the army. Neither one admonished me, asked if I had repented etc. Both knew my story in great detail and boy was some of it a great time to put out on the table, but I was never called to repentance for not going...recommend in pocket. This is why I don't understand why so many get all in a tizzy when someone didn't go on a mission or resorts to name calling.

I think they should go if they want to. If they don't want to and won't do a good job, then why waste the time. Many think all should go no matter what. Many families just care that you go so they can maintain " good standing" in the eyes of their friends.....whatever that even is.

I'm thinking he went on a mission though...right?

Thats probably accurate. I would have been one of the ones just spinning my wheels till I got my heroes welcome home two years later. Not saying that is right and it is not, just being honest. Let me tell you, that was not an admirable trait at the time.

Yea and neither Nelson or Monson were drafted. Both were single in peacetime and chose college over a mission. As it has already been said here that whoever opts not to go on a mission is selfish and lousy...just curious how it applies to our propbets. Just say in.

That's a dumb answer...hyperbole much? Just asking. 800 lb elephant in the room Keep in mind, I'm not the one who posted here that it was selfish and lousy not to serve

Still doesnt account for why they did not... just curious, why did they have better things to do like uhhhh college. Since we are on the accountability train, what is the penalty, punishment or whatever for not serving a full time mission? No recommend, no higher calling, disfellowship...what? Answer: there is no accountability because it isn't and never was a commandment to serve a full time mission

Current and most recent late prophet were not drafted, yet still chose to not serve a mission. How can they do that and not be lazy and selfish???? Or are they? Just curious

Our current and also most recent late prophet chose not to serve missions. Please tell us how they will be held accountable. There are many other gen authorities in the same boat.

You are right. I'm just reading what was written, not what I want it to say ? The author chose to make it two separate sentences. If the two ideas were separated by "and" instead of a period, then perhaps it may not come off like it does. It says what it says and apparently many here agree. If one of my sister's would have tried to wear pants to church there would have been a mini Armageddon in our home. My parents were so ultra orthodox pioneer decendant hard core lds it would scare the crap out of some. That said, I dont think it appropriate for Sunday services, but I don't care enough to call someone out on it. And the white dudes who are not Polynesian or Hawaiian can leave those dresses home.

Prob not...?

Maybe a dress. After all we have gay men in priesthood positions now, why not in drag Before someone calls me out: http://mitchmayne.com

Not a neener game. Just pointing out that you are prone to judge from afar also.

I recently went to a sealing and there were at least 15 or 20 men with beards and goatees.....To include the groom lol. My old bishop just a few years ago used to yank any kid off the sacrament detail who had any facial hair at all. Made up rules. My own bishop used to order kids to cut their hair when I was in hs or they were not allowed to perform any ordinances. We got down to about 4 boys and he rest were elders or HP.