Kayvex

I guess my thought is that--yeah, porn use is toxic.  On the other hand, I don't know that demanding a person be porn-free for ten years prior to marriage is realistic given the realities and prevalence of the problem.
 
In March of 1999--when the internet was in relative infancy--Brent Top and Bruce Chadwick published some statistics in the Ensign about a number of problematic behaviors by LDS youth.  Among their findings was that (depending on whether they lived on the east coast, west coast, or Utah) 39-46% of LDS boys and 16-27% of LDS girls admitted to having watched sexually explicit/pornographic videos.
 
I have also heard, anecdotally and without any form of authoritative attribution, that some internal numbers from the Church indicate that something like 60-70% of male BYU students admitted to having consumed porn within the last year.
 
IF that's the case (and I'd be very glad to see hard evidence that it's not), then it strikes me that my daughters may have a very difficult time finding a man in his twenties or thirties who has never deliberately sought out a pornographic image in the past ten years.  If my daughter stands a significant chance of marrying a porn user either way, I'm tempted to say that I'd at least prefer she marry a porn user who admits to his use and is actively trying to stop.  (Yeah, it's terrible that we live in a society where we have to make this concession; and as a Church we can and should do better.  But until then . . . I'm afraid dem's the breaks.)
 
And, while I share TFP's concerns about the word "addiction" becoming a crutch/excuse for sin--for better or for worse, the Church's current program for getting guys to quit looking at porn is designed as and labeled an addiction recovery program.

I've been lurking here for a bit now, and realized I never introduced myself!
 
I'm Kayvax! I also go by several other names, but Kay and Vaxy work around these parts. I am a 19 year old true-blue born and bred member of the LDS church. I was born in Utah, moved to New Mexico when I was 2, and have lived in Georgia since I turned 10.
 
I love a lot of things. I am a major food-nut, and can basically eat my own tiny weight in delicious foods. Burritos are especially a favorite. I also enjoy all cultural foods I've ever tried (and my asian friends always gave me an accurate taste of what they could make). I also love steak, curry, boba smoothies (no tea of course), noodles, honey, and lamb shanks.
 
I'm currently in school studying Computer Science, with a focus in Computer Hacking. I have done a lot of hacking in my days, sketchy and not, but nothing illegal. I plan on becoming an ethical hacker for businesses to help consult them involving security and protecting their data and the data of their customers. It's a pretty good field these days!
 
For now though, I am a zoo keeper at a small zoo here in Georgia. I manage the reptile house! Snakes are a passion of mine, and I breed Hognose snakes as a hobby (cute little buggers!). I also work at a small robotics company as a programmer and assistant. It's a living!
 
Hobby-wise, I recently took up Warhammer 40k, and love the chaos of it all. I am also an avid gamer, playing everything I can find, but my genres are RPG's, free-roaming games, and survival horror! I also love cartoons, anime, and crime shows. I draw anthropomorphic animals for fun, and represent the people I know as animals (because I could never catch on drawing people!)
 
I'm marrying my wonderful fiance in December, and look forward to an awesome eternity with an incredible and patient man.
 
 

Not gonna comment on whether I think the marriage should proceed or not, because I don't know enough about the situation to even form an opinion, let alone be confident enough to say what should happen.
 
But I did want to toss in a 2 cent thought... People are reacting here to one side of the story.  Frankly, in reading between the lines I'm rather sympathetic to the boyfriend.  I can understand completely why he'd be frustrated and sensitive.  He's trying to look forward to his wedding to a woman he loves, and he probably feels like a yo-yo... Up and down, up and down... Wedding's, on, wedding's off wedding's on, wedding's off.  I'd probably have a short fuse too at this point.
 
I bet he wakes up every morning dreading the possibility that today, the wedding will be called off yet again, and he'll have to play the patient, longsuffering fiancee' who must, at this point, feel like if she really wanted to be with him this problem wouldn't keep popping up.
 
If I were in his shoes, I'd probably have at least postponed the wedding if not canceled it outright just because by now his emotions must be worn thin.  I mean, think about it.  He heard the news about his horrible illness and stayed with her and continued loving her.  Does that entitle him to be loved back?  Well no it doesn't, but some part of him must be feeling a little under appreciated here.
 
I dunno that's all I've go really... Just sad to see people joining the bandwagon that characterized him as an antisocial abuser.  Remember, folks... We've only heard one side.

If the thought of marrying someone makes you feel like having a panic attack, it's a pretty good sign you shouldn't marry them.

No big deal. My friends and I have "tea" all the time, as one of them is british and one of them is romanian. We just call it tea, but usually it's say, a late lunch or a get together. The second you start ripping too deep into things is when situations can get dangerous and "judgy". Just live! You aren't breaking the word of wisdom by putting a bit of orange juice in a teacup, and it's a good, enriching activity to gather in a calm and social setting. Worrying "oh it's called a tea party that could look bad", just makes it look bad, no?

No big deal. My friends and I have "tea" all the time, as one of them is british and one of them is romanian. We just call it tea, but usually it's say, a late lunch or a get together. The second you start ripping too deep into things is when situations can get dangerous and "judgy". Just live! You aren't breaking the word of wisdom by putting a bit of orange juice in a teacup, and it's a good, enriching activity to gather in a calm and social setting. Worrying "oh it's called a tea party that could look bad", just makes it look bad, no?

I don't disagree with you but I think we need to make something clear for those who might misunderstand your post. It could lead someone to assume that unless a disciplinary council is held there will be NO discipline at all. There's a difference between "formal" discipline and "informal" discipline.  Formal discipline occurs after a disciplinary council is held and the bishop or the stake president decides that some form of discipline should be meted out. Informal discipline occurs when an individual meets with a bishop and confesses to some infraction that doesn't require a disciplinary council (e.g. use of pornography, self abuse, word of wisdom violation, etc.)While no disciplinary council is necessary for these infractions, the bishop has the right to confer "informal" discipline (e.g. restrictions on preparing, passing or partaking the Sacrament, holding a church calling, speaking in Church, exercising the priesthood, etc.) Just thought we should make that clear.  :)

You are correct.
 
anatess---you wrote: "Sure. But that still falls within the bounds of my answer that... Use of Pornography can get you sent to a disciplinary council."
 
Personal addiction and use of pornography will not result in a disciplinary council. However, it may very well result in informal Church discipline such as restrictions on partaking the Sacrament, holding a Church position, exercising the Priesthood, etc.
 
You also wrote: Omega also said something about drinking coffee. Not finding anything wrong with drinking coffee... you can't get baptized with that. But for those baptized and then developed the thinking that there's nothing wrong with coffee, then drinks it... that could lead to the bishop having a talk. Then you start encouraging others to have coffee with you... I can see that going to disciplinary council if the person persists.
 
WOW violations  will not result in a disciplinary council either. I suppose if someone opposed the restrictions and actively encouraged other members to violate them it could result in a disciplinary council, but the case would then fall under the definition of apostasy.
 
askandanswer wrote: "But then we are still left with the seemingly odd situation where breaching some temple covenants can result in an excommunication, and breaching other covenants seemingly has not impact on the breaker's church standing."
 
Regarding disciplinary councils I think you're overly fixated on temple covenants (particularly the sealing covenants), which are in no way the be-all and end-all when it comes to Church discipline. 
 
Remember, the three-fold purpose of Church discipline is to:
Save the Souls of Transgressors
Protect the Innocent
Safeguard the Integrity of the Church.
 
In regards to two people deciding they no longer wish to be married (absent sins that could get one or both excommunicated) it's difficult to argue that excommunication or other punishment would satisfy any of the three. 

I’ve been following  this thread for the past week or so, and having quite a bit of personal experience with disciplinary councils (both bishop and stake) I've wanted to participate. But I've been reluctant due to the fact that I couldn't see a way to do the subject justice without a lengthy post. 
I've decided to give it a shot, and while long, hopefully my post won’t be a waste of space.
 
I don't have an exact count, but I'm guessing I've been involved in somewhere around 18 (front end) disciplinary councils. None resulted in probation, one resulted in no action (temporarily), two resulted in disfellowshipment, and the rest resulted in excommunication.
 
Certain sins require a mandatory disciplinary council, but for the most part the decision is left up to the Bishop or Stake Presidency based upon various conditions and circumstances. The bishop and his counselors normally handle cases involving women and non-Melchizedek Priesthood holders. If the case may result in the excommunication of a man who holds the Melchizedek Priesthood (particularly if he has been endowed) the case is transferred to the Stake.
 
Palerider wrote: “Another thing....there are some leaders who don't enjoy Displinary Councils and they will do what they can not to hold them.”
 
This is true. In fact I have seen bishops bend over backwards to avoid holding a disciplinary council; ignoring egregious situations until a Stake President literally had to say "do it or else!" 
It's been my experience that the most difficult cases, and the ones most bishops try to avoid, are those that involve women who have committed fornication or adultery. It doesn’t take much imagination to understand why.
Three men sitting in a room alone with a woman who is confessing to such things is extremely uncomfortable for all involved.
Been there, done that, and don't wish to ever do it again.
 
The thing I really wanted to touch on though is the concept of the "double standard" that a few here have postured.
 
In regards to that I'll note what priesthoodpower wrote: "I would think that the church DC is the same thing and the Bishop/Stake Pres/council members are listening to the spirit as their guiding factor."
 
Listening to the Spirit SHOULD, and I believe in most cases IS the guiding factor. And sometimes that results in actions that appear to be unfair (or a double standard) in the eyes of those who see things only through a "glass darkly" so to speak.
I'll give you an example. 
 
While I was serving on a Stake High Council we had a case before us respecting a gentleman who at the time was serving as a bishop’s counselor. The man had been in an adulterous relationship for quite some time before it was discovered, whereupon he was released from his position in the bishopric and subsequently a disciplinary council was convened. 
The man refused to appear before the council, but he did send a letter, which was read by the Stake President (minus the 4-letter words). The letter informed us that he no longer believed in the Church, no longer wanted to be a part of it, had no plans to leave his adulterous relationship, and that all 15 of us were more than welcome to do something anatomically impossible.
 
After reading the letter the Stake president opened the meeting up to comments and concerns. Those who wished to speak did so, it was determined that the case was a "simple one", numbers were drawn to determine who would speak in behalf of the Church and the accused, the two men who drew the numbers had their say, and the Stake Presidency retired to an office to pray about a decision. 
While they were gone the members of the High Council discussed the case among themselves and it was clear we were all in agreement---the man HAD to be excommunicated.
After quite some time the Stake President and his counselors returned to the room. The Stake President then said words to this effect:
"Brethren, we have supplicated our Father in Heaven for His guidance in this matter and we want only to do his will. And the three of us agree that it is NOT the will of our father in Heaven that Bro. _____________ be excommunicated at this time. Therefore we propose that no action be taken against him until we receive further instructions."
 
You could have heard a gnat burp in that room at that moment. All twelve of us were dumbfounded. None of us could believe what we had just heard. 
The Stake President then went on to say words to this effect: "Brethren, we understand this decision doesn't make much sense to you, and honestly it doesn't make much sense to us, but we believe the Lord has spoken and we ask for your sustaining vote."
The vote was unanimous to sustain the decision, and we all left the meeting in complete bewilderment.
What was even more bewildering is that the woman who Bro._________ was having the adulterous relationship with WAS excommunicated! 
 
Fast forward about four months later.
Another disciplinary council is convened. 
We arrive not knowing what it will be about.
We find out soon enough that it pertains to Bro. __________ who sent us the nasty letter four months previous.
This time, however, he is present at the meeting with his bishop in tow.
His bishop relates the story about Bro. ___________ receiving notice (from him) that the decision was NOT to excommunicate him. 
He tells us that when Bro______________ received that information he proceeded to break down and bawl like a little child. The bishop tells us that his entire demeanor changed and he suddenly became humble and penitent.
Over the next four months Bro.________ made further changes until he was finally ready to appear willingly before another disciplinary council. 
And there he was; standing before us a changed man.
And the story he told was heart wrenching. 
And his closing remarks were humbling to all of us.
 
He said: "Brethren, I just want you to know that I know that you were following God’s will when you declined to excommunicate me four months ago. I was angry and bitter and hateful and I couldn't wait to be free from God and this Church. And had you excommunicated me I do not believe I would be standing here right now. When the bishop told me that you had decided not to excommunicate me something changed within me. I don't really understand it and I don't know how to describe it, but all of the hurt and hate and anger just melted away and I no longer wanted to be without God and the Church in my life. I am here today to tell you that I am now ready to be excommunicated if that is what needs to take place for me to come back, and as a matter of fact, I believe it does.”
 
And he was excommunicated.
And he did come back and was rebaptized.
And as far as I know he is still in full fellowship with God and the Church.
 
The point I want to make with this story is that there were many people in his ward and within the Stake who knew of this man, knew his circumstances, and were extremely put out when his girlfriend was excommunicated while he wasn't. For four months we endured wholesale carping and murmuring from members who decried the "double standard". 
 
Now I'm not going to claim that every decision to excommunicate or not to excommunicate comes from God.
Obviously Bishops and Stake Presidents aren't infallible.
But what I will say is that all of us need to be careful before pronouncing a "double standard" when it comes to disciplinary councils. 
We should remember that God's ways are higher than our ways; and his thoughts higher than our thoughts. And since none of us knows what goes on in a disciplinary council that we have no part in, we should be willing to give a bishopric or a stake presidency and high council the benefit of the doubt.

Don't expect her to change. Really, don't. She might be playing along for a moment- heck, maybe she really IS trying to be different, but it will always go back to square one unless she get some serious counseling. I also have to agree you may be suffering from co-dependency. I was engaged to a man who didn't treat me well, but I made excuses for him because "I loved him", and hoped he would change overtime, thinking that maybe I needed to fix myself- that maybe I was the one causing him to be that way. It was when my best friend sat down with me and talked to me about co-dependency my eyes opened up and I was able to leave. Thankfully we were not married.

The way she treats you is absolutely unacceptable. She is abusing you. You are NOT the reason why she is doing this. This is her own problem she needs to work through. Sure, a marriage isn't perfect, and you will always have your flaws, but there is NO excuse for her behavior. I know my husband would have flown out that door from the start had I treated him the way she treats you. 

I understand she's your wife. You love her. You cling onto hope. You envision the future to be bright with her changed and being a good mom. You see yourselves past all of this and thinking it was just a phase. But I promise you, it will NOT go away on its own. 

I also recommend she get a hormone panel (it's just a simple blood test). I too had emotional outbursts (not quite as severe as your wife), only to find out later my hormones were way off. As soon as I started getting treated for them to get back on track, things changed for me. How is she taking care of herself? Does she have weight issues? Does she exercise? Eat well? 

Anyway, stop blaming yourself. Her behavior is not okay.

One more piece of advice: Do not demand respect. Don't point your finger at her, don't raise your voice at her, and don't get superior with her when she talks down to you. You're not "bigger" than her. Remain calm, or walk away if you are unable to do so. Go for a drive if she follows you around. Tell her you don't appreciate the way you're being talked to, and you'll be willing to talk when you've both cooled off.  If she throws a tantrum, so be it. If she breaks your items, go somewhere else for the night- or the next few days. Don't tolerate that behavior, and don't give in if she apologizes and begs for forgiveness. Stand your ground. Also, instead of saying, "You NEED to do this", or "You SHOULD do this", say, "It would mean a lot to me if you (insert request)." Telling her what she needs and should do will only get her on defense.

I really, really, want to say leave this marriage soon. Especially, and I mean especially before children. Having a child is no easy feat and it will only further harm a suffering marriage. But I see you want to work this out, so I urge you to pray together as a couple. Really pray. Seek advice from your bishop, and get into counseling soon. I'm sorry this has been so hard for both of you. 

Because you human and you can make mistakes...  Because you are human and sometimes we learn what we really need to do by making a huge mess of things by doing the wrong thing first...  Because marriage takes two to work but only one person to break it.
 
You need to know the Lord's will for you in this matter and hold on to it with both hands... No one here can tell you what that is.  We can only try to help with words and hope and pray that things will go well for you

Speaking only for this snippet quoted above, this might be the worst advice possible. Never use sex as a bargaining tool or withhold it as a punishment. That is like 180 degrees from what you should ever be doing. Terrible, terrible idea.

As an avid gamer, I can personally say I have never played a perfectly clean game. Such a thing does not exist. It's media, just like movies. Even the Lion King has violence.
 
That being said, stick to Nintendo and Disney based games if you are trying to keep safe, especially sexually. I didn't start playing videogames until I aged in for the ratings I was playing, and that is a suggestion I hold very strongly for everyone, not just for Mormons. And most games I played when I was younger I played with my father, who knew when to stop things.
 
Epic Mickey, Viva Pinata, some old games like Blinx the Time Sweeper and Ty the Tasmanian Tiger, Zoo Tycoon (and any of the tycoon games such as Roller Coaster Tycoon, etc) are the most innocent games I've played. Rayman has some question content in some of it's editions, but it is an excellent game if you don't play too wildly in the bonus content in the menu.
 
Always remember, these things are often what you make them. If Legend of Zelda gives you bad thoughts, I can honestly insist it is not the game... If very delicate and appropriate things are stimuli for you, seek professional help. Trust me, I know. Once you let your mind on that track, anything can affect it. Finding a way to get off of it is the key.
 
Me, I don't mind the violent or scary games. To me they are just games, and I respect anyone who believes otherwise! I've just been so avid for so long, I don't like to miss out on all the good and positivity games give me.
That being said, games i suggest to avoid...
Grand Theft Auto, Saints Row
For reasons

Just started Dragon Age: Inquisition and I'm more than halfway through gameplay. I'm not sure what the rating is, I'm in my 30's, but I haven't found it to be explicit at all. There is romancing, which allows characters to flirt with and court other characters, but it is an optional route and can be avoided entirely if you so desire. To adjust the game to even more "kid friendly" levels, you can go into options and turn off "gore". You won't see any blood shed when your warrior swings his sword around.

Oh, if you haven't played Epic Mickey on the Wii you should give that a go.  I don't think it, or its sequel, have anything questionable, and they're both fun.

The Witcher franchise is definitely not appropriate for children. The gameplay is very dark and gritty, and does have some graphic cut scenes that would probably make most people uncomfortable to some degree, but it is an excellent story to follow and the gameplay is intriguing. I've been a Witcher fan for awhile and I'm excited to checkout Witcher 3 when it's released on PS4.

I've been following along here, trying to think of 100% everything is hunky dory in a game, and, honestly, you're really only looking at Super Mario Brothers and (I think, someone can set me straight if I'm wrong) it's spin offs (ie. Super Mario Kart).  Games are becoming more and more an art form, meaning the makers are, increasingly, artists, and artists want to say something about the world around them, or they want to push boundaries in some way.  We see this in action games with more and more realistic violence (I'm thinking Dark Souls right now, because that's what I've been playing).  We see it in RPGs with more and more "adult" themes, such as the scantily dressed individual you guys were talking about in the Zelda game (I don't play Zelda games, so I don't know who it was, or what the questionable material was).
 
I guess what I'm driving at is that you have to make a choice when it comes to entertainment:  What is acceptable to me, and what is not?  And this will vary between people.  A great example of this the book Les Mis, which has been made into stirring plays and movies.  Is it clean?  Meh, not super.  It has prostitution, violence, and child abuse.  I've also heard President Monson say it's one of his favorite stories, because it shows many of life's realities while showing the importance of kindness and mercy.  So, is it okay to watch Les Mis?  I wouldn't even put Pres. Monson's comments into the equation, because, for him, it's good, but it might not be for some of the rest of us.
 
To the OP, go ahead take the list here and look into stuff to see if it seems like something that would be appropriate for you.  It's good you're concerned, as what we put into our minds has a great impact on what we become, but know that what is 'appropriate' for one person, might not be for another.  If you're as sensitive to 'inappropriate' stuff in games, you'll likely not play a ton of games... which, arguably, could be a good thing.  :)

*sigh*

In the Book of Mormon, we have a dude who lops the arms off of a score of dudes and leaves their bleeding, armless selves to go get medical attention!

I am infertile, and three seperate teams of doctors have not been able to tell me why I cannot concieve. The hardest part of the past six years have been all of the cultural and emotional ramifications of this non-diagnosis. So, as much as I would enjoy serving in YW at some point, I don't think I ever really could. I do not think I could trust myself to keep my mouth shut during all of the lessons about their future motherhood. The reality is, 1 out of 8 women will have trouble conceiving or carrying a pregnancy. Statistically, thats three girls out of our ward's current YW group who will struggle to get the chance to fulfill that role. I am certain that I would be much better off right now if I had never participated in the YW program. There was no way for anyone to tell what my future life would look like, so of course no one is to blame, but I was built up over 6+ years to expect and depend on my ability to bear children. The higher the expectations, the harder the crash and deeper the disappointment. I'm not saying we should devote entire lessons to infertility, or do away with lessons about motherhood, but there really ought to be a better balance between the two. Because while the church is kind to childless women, the people and culture of the church absolutely are not. Same goes for the expectations for "all worthy young men" to serve full time missions. Big expectations, preparing your whole life for an event, then when it can't happen you are supposed to just be okay with it. I think of this as a child who has to watch all of their siblings get everything they want for Christmas, but they recieve nothing, and are told that because they have no new toys to busy themselves with.. they can clean up the kitchen. 

It is a "cultural" expectation enforced thoughout the raising of our youth. It is heartbreaking for a young man or woman who wants to go, deserves to go, who worked to be eligible to go only to be told 'no'. The expectation should be set early on that not everyone 'can' go, or 'should' go, or even is 'required' to go.
 
All the recommendations of serving some other way do not help the person who feels a faliure in their society for not meeting cultural expectations.

I thought this post was about World of Warcraft.... I'll be going now

I thought this post was about World of Warcraft.... I'll be going now

I think I would be a bit disturbed to find a leader who did enjoy Disciplinary Councils...  Unless of course you are talking about the ones held to lift restrictions and return those to full-fellowship...  I can see those as being very awesome 

Very cool intro. Thanks!
 
You are an interesting person.  Congrats on the engagement!