Meerkatarmy

When I first joined the site I started a topic about wearing trousers to church. There was a long discussion I took some of it on board ignored the rest. I wore trousers to church there was no real response, I was the only one but didn't think much of it. The something Anatess I believe said about following the norm can make others comfortable and keep the focus on what we're there to do. I know when I attended church I was worried about what people would think of a female wear mens trousers, rather than the sacrament or the lesson or strengthening my testimony and helping others. I now wear a skirt or female suit because fitting in and following the norm keeps my mind on what I am there to do. Around the same time a simular thread was started about boys not wearing white shirts to pass the sacrament and in someones ward it had become the cool thing for the boys to wear bow ties to pass sacrament. At the time I thought big deal who cares but again something being out of the norm can draw yours and others attention away from the purpose of being there on a Sunday. Back on topic I think the white shirt thing is good because it is nutrel it doesn't scream look at me you just blend in and the atmosphe can stay on focus. At other events I think people should wear what they want in multi colours for all I care

Not to minimize your feelings which may be distressing etc but if any one said to me they went through their whole marriage without finding any one else is attractive I would call them a lair. It is natural I look at people think wow you're hot then I think but would you be there for me like my partner is, are they as funny etc. I think we need further clarification if you want to stay married etc

I paid a young guy £50 to feed my fish as I knew he was saving for his mission and money issues were stressing him out but there would be no way I could do that on a regular basis nither would I have paid his little brother the same amount

I think Spirit Dragon has a point may be your husband is thinking am I not enough? Am I not attractive to her etc etc . Perhaps some reassurance would help? You clearly have a strong relationship to even be able to discuss these things. May be being more affectionate will help him feel you are attracted to him.

I am gay and Mormon. I am here if you want to talk to someone who has similar experiences. If you want to stay in the relationship with your husband I would suggest couples therapy because this effects you both. I just want to point out no counseling will stop you having these feelings no matter what they say they can do; they may be able to get you to a point where you repress the feelings and continue to have a healthish relationship with your husband. I am a member of a few facebook groups for gay Mormons if you are interested in joining pm me and I will let you know what they are

I was cruising LDS forums and I found this, what do people make of it? STATEMENT REGARDING THE BOOK OF MORMON 1. The Smithsonian Institution has never used the Book of Mormon in any way as a scientific guide. Smithsonian archeologists see no direct connection between the archeology of the New World and the subject matter of the book. 2. The physical type of the American Indian is basically Mongoloid, being most closely related to that of the peoples of eastern. central, and northeastern Asia. Archeological evidence indicates that the ancestors of the present Indians cane into the New World - probably over a land bridge known to have existed in the Being Strait region during the last Ice Age - in a continuing series of small migrations beginning from about 25,000 to 30,000 years ago. 3. Present evidence indicates that the first people to reach this continent from the East were the Norsemen who briefly visited the northeastern part of North America around A.D. 1000 and then settled in Greenland. There is nothing to show that they reached Mexico or Central America. 4. One of the main lines of evidence supporting the scientific finding that contacts with Old World civilizations if indeed they occurred at all, were of very little significance for the development of American Indian civilizations, is the fact that none of the principal Old World domesticated food plants or animals (except the dog) occurred in the New World in pre-Columbian times. American Indians had no wheat, barley, oats, millet, rice, cattle, pigs, chickens, horses, donkeys, camels before 1492. (Camels and horses were in the Americas, along with the bison, mammoth, and mastodon, but all these animals became extinct around 10,000 B.C. at the time when the early big game hunters spread across the Americas.) 5. Iron, steel, glass, and silk were not used in the New World before 1492 (except for occasional use of unsmelted meteoric iron). Native copper was worked in various locations in pre-Columbian times, but true metallurgy was limited to southern Mexico and the Andean region, where its occurrence in late prehistoric times involved gold, silver, copper, and their alloys, but not iron. 6. There is a possibility that the spread of cultural traits across the Pacific to Mesoamerica and the northwestern coast of South America began several hundred years before the Christian era. However, any such inter-hemispheric contacts appear to have been the results of accidental voyages originating in eastern and southern Asia. It is by no means certain that even such contacts occurred; certainly there were no contacts with the ancient Egyptians, Hebrews, or other peoples of Western Asian and the Near East. 7. No reputable Egyptologist or other specialist on Old World archeology, and no expert on New World prehistory, has discovered or confirmed any relationship between archeological remains in Mexico and archeological remains in Egypt. 8. Reports of findings of ancient Egyptian, Hebrew, and other Old World writings in the New World in pre-Columbian contexts have frequently appeared in newspapers, magazines, and sensational books. None of these claims has stood up to examination by reputable scholars. No inscriptions using Old World forms of writing have been shown to have occurred in any part of the Americas before 1492 except for a few Norse rune stones which have been found in Greenland. [Removed link to source at anti-Mormon website. --JAG]

I am sorry but I support the daughter. The bishop did not need to dig further, she said she broke toc, the only further question I can see that is relevant is did you have full sex. I wouldn't allow any grown man interview my children on such sensitive issues. The bishops and leaders are not police checked like other people working with young people/children would be so I think we do need to be cautious how much/when they have unsuppervised access to our children

I am about as likely to go to a YSA dance as I am to poke my self in the eye with rusty spoons but I just presumed DJ's used versions of songs that were suitable for radio ? Therefore removing swearing overtly sexual themes etc. Where do YSA who like rock/metal/punk go for dances?

Pam don't worry it was just an example that I thought of on the hop

A topic in the advcie board got me thinking. Imagine you have a buisness and need to advertise your wears. Two marketing people come to a meeting with you. Both have degrees in the marketing filed from good schools. However, one has more in field experience than the other. The other one is a member of the church. Would you employ the member on the strength of them being a member or is it purely about experience?

I only mentioned age because if it was a young person doing it for pocket money I would pay less than I would to some one who did this as their career.

I am not endowed yet. But when I am, I suspect I will find garments uncommfortable because I have sensory issues that mean I find many fabrics/clothes touching my skin uncomfortable and annoying but I will wear them to remind me of the convants I made. Personally I don't think I would hang out just wearing them because kinda in my mind they are in a way being naked I am not explaining properly but I know what I mean. I wouldn't judge anyone who did hang about in them though, unless it was some one other than my partner and I had gone to visit them, that could be akward

Israel, Pakistan, Romania, Ukraine and Vietnam were my favourite Philippines was the worst

The Uk's was really bizzare. I didn't like any of the 'western' pictures

Like Pam says depends on a lot. If you were to employ a gardener they charge at least £10 an hour. I'd probably give some one around £60 depending on how much they really did, their age etc

I am not sure really I just can't get enthusiastic about a countries team that doesn't even call the game by its correct name, plus the Netherlands are closer to England than the US. I don't think they will win but they will probably be in the final. I think Germany are going to do it.

I agree with the vast majority of what you are saying estradling. Other than the morality and voting point. I keep to the WOW and do not drink alcohol and I think it is a destructive damaging substance with no positives but if a vote came about to introduce prohibition I would vote against as my moral decisions have no place in the law of the land. If it did women walking round with more flesh uncovered by their clothes than covered would be banned, men waling round with their beer belly's hanging out would be banned and fake tan would be on a punishment level of class a drugs

Back on topic I am English as our my whole family so should support England but I find them over paid underachievers who don't seem to care much about performing for the international team however with so mmany young players up and coming perhaps the attitude will change. My partner is American working for LDS family services in Birmingham so I guess I could support USA but I just can't do it. So I support the Netherlands.

Ha I am accepting of Americans changing and adapting but this one makes no sense to me! I could care less = it matters some what to you I couldn't care less= you do not care at all

I can see where you are coming from but how do we extend the knowledge we have about sin and Gods will? To me banning SS marriage or anything we consider sinful is like a parent banning candy for their children but not explaining why. If we explain why we are against SS marriage or what ever and then people use their agency to ignore us and d it any way we have met our obligation. I truly feel that this is how Heavenly Father wants us to treat our brothers and sisters as this is how he treats them, he shows both sides then lets us decide what to do. As for my decisions and the after life I know full well I will not ake it to the celestial kingdom but I am happy to make it to the terrestrial kingdom.

I think it is complicated and with out going into the personal details of my relationship, I would not marry and keep the laws that all Mormons are expected to regardless of who they are attracted to. I do this as a member of a church I chose to join. I gained my own tesomony and whilst it has been shaken it grows in strength and I know pride is a sin but I am proud to be a Mormon; I was well aware of the doctrinenal stand point on ss relationships and I came to the decision my tesomny is too strong and my love for the Saviour to strong to not become a member and serve him. But may be I was a bit confrontatual or what ever in my first post or not clear. I feel that people who have not made that commitment should be allowed to marry members of the same sex. And the leaders of the church should for want of a better and more respectful phase keep their noses out and concentrate on what their members are doing. I do not believe in eternal damnation and I do not believe that to be doctrine I believe it is in doctrine and convents 33 ( I do not have my scriptures with me to check) That Joseph Smith asks about his brother that died before he had a chance to hear the gospel and the Lord told him all will have the opportunity once passed to here the gospel and be offered a place in his kingdom and they are free to listen or reject. My understanding is if you reject it isn't really damnation you just will not be truly happy because you will not be reunited with your Heavenly Father. Please do not see this as confrontation it isn't meant to be and it is just my understanding. Our differing inturpritations and view points on the gospal is what makes the church rich with interesting people rather than just drone repeating what a preacher says.

If you can not see a difference between an illgal act such as child abuse, fruad etc and two consensual adults in love getting married then I will pray for you sir.

I knew it was a mistake posting on this thread as a gay Mormon. The difference between things that are against the law and same sex relationships is the fact things that are illegal generally hurt people or property. I know your response will be that same sex relationships hurt people but I can assure you they do not. I am loved by Christ, Heavenly Father, my partner and on the whole members of my ward and actively gay so my sexuality does not hurt me.

Marriage is a legal thing declaring your love and support of each other and gaining the legal rights that go with that to non religious folk, therefore the church should have no say in same sex marriage. Our brothers and sisters have free agency they should be given the right to choose. However, in the UK there is a chance churches could be made to conduct same sex marriages that is completely wrong. I believe both sides deserve respect and for some one to march in to a church and say you must marry me is not showing any respect at al. I can't see why any one would want to be mmarried by someone who is forced to do it

Also I think we need to bare in mind that bishops/priests from other faiths are trianed in things like this as it is their vocation. LDS bishops are just called appon to do the job as well as their day job and to continue their family life. I know I had noticed the difference between my old anglican priest and the church bishop. But as I said mostly they want to help