NeedleinA

This; if Thomas S Monson calls me up and says "Hey, don't sell your Southwest Airlines stock until winter," it may or may not be a good stock tip, but disregarding it is hardly a sin.  Now if he sends me a letter signed by all of the top 15, I'm going to pay attention...though I'll probably burn the letter and scatter the ashes to hide evidence of what really sounds like it came from insider tips.
Yup; according to an online thesaurus, synonyms for "sparingly" include:
casually - don't wear a tie to the barbecue place delicately - not like a Saint Bernard easily - one would hope freely - as you like it gingerly - see "delicately" mildly - don't beat people up and take their meat, but eat your own however you want moderately - pretty subjective quietly - hush and eat your meat simply - just meat slightly - nibble at it softly - stop smacking subtly - don't tell everybody, just eat agilely - I don't want to know carelessly - best applied to ribs ethereally - uh, yeah, whatever flippantly - don't have to care, just eat frivolously - chicken fried prime rib heedlessly - well, you're obviously not listening anyway indifferently - again with the not caring nimbly - still don't want to know peacefully - yup, keep quiet smoothly - again, I hope so

This book is not doctrine and for you to think that it is is the mistake. It is a book of JFS opinions about answers to gospel questions
Well for starters it does not say eat very little meat it say to eat meat sparingly which is very subjective. I am not addicted to eating blood although I have eaten blood sausage and other dishes of the like. There is no doctrinal prohibition.
It is not false doctrine. How can it be? It was never doctrine to begin with. I also don't want to burst your bubble but while foreordination is a "thing" it is not guaranteed that the individual will fulfill the calling that has been placed before them or that they will be called. As it turns out JFS was called to be a prophet, but I see an unhealthy amount of hero worship going on here. Please keep in mind that he was just a man.

How I deal with nighttime auditory processing issues.

I think the more one focuses on ghosts, scary situations, how awful the darkness is, then one becomes more scared. 
Instead of thinking it's bad spirits, I would focus more on finding positive, happy thoughts--reading good books (that doesn't mean limit yourself to scriptures), watching uplifting TV/movies, avoiding the negative on the internet, etc. If you hear something unusual at night, try to focus on finding the source (was it a pet, critter, etc.?), creaking board, etc.? Old buildings make noise. Sometimes it might be appliances, sometimes it's just the old framework settling.
I do believe in evil spirits, but I don't believe they waste their time knocking on doors or opening drawers or some such things. I think those things are more often attributed to the living.
And do have your house dedicated. I think just having that done will settle your feelings and allow you to focus on how to honor that dedication.  Good luck!

This was my sloppy poorly written way of saying, that I am in your boat Vort when it comes to lacking the gene of thinking other's lives are perfect. I only realize that it is a potential problem having sat through GD for so many years now. Since there are new members here and investigators also, if they ever read this thread, and they have felt that way before, I thought I should mention it for at least their benefit. 

You say you understand... But then ask question that show you do not understand...
God has set up a pattern for giving revelation to the church as a whole.  That is through the Prophet and 12 Apostles.  Period.  That instruction/direction might then be published Deseret Book or other sources.  But Deseret Book and other sources also publish works of Fiction, and opinions and personal experiences, some of which might contain false doctrine. Some might speculate on things not revealed and might be true or might be false. So it should be very clear that the publishers do not define if something is doctrine.
On your subject matter you have been challenged to find any instance of God using the pattern he set up to declare in this dispensation that consuming of blood is forbidden.  The only thing you have is the work Answer to Gospel Question which has been repeatedly pointed out did not follow the pattern.  Yet the Lord repeated a whole lot of commandments through Joseph Smith that we do follow and even gave new ones like the Word of Wisdom, all through this pattern.
Why did God not repeat the commandment not to consume blood when he was clearly willing to repeat a whole lot of other commandments and bind us to them?  We don't know.  We can presume it was for a wise purpose in him. 
As someone that find the ideas of consuming blood in the manor you describe kinda icky, and as someone that would have no problem with it if it was a command from God, it is clear that if I had a bias in this matter it would be in agreement with yours.  But I find no support for you position in the modern revelations.  And I do have strong objections to people adding "More or Less" to what God has commanded.
 
 

When I was a kid (up to about 4-ish I suppose) our family used to go on holiday to Whitsand Bay in Cornwall, which is a great place for a family holiday. My dad used to take me crab-fishing in the rockpools, and there was a cave which I felt sure was full of pirate treasure if only I could dig deep enough. And this idea seemed well-founded, because when I dug I would sometimes find thruppeny bits (this was in the days of "old money") - though I nowadays suspect that my parents would bury them beforehand for me to find.
Anyway, through the window of our hotel room you could see the Eddystone Lighthouse - the world's first ever offshore lighthouse (though not the current structure - that was built some time in the 1880s) and the subject of a well-known shanty involving a mermaid and a lighthouse keeper (Google it).
I remember it looking like a white pillar sticking out of the sea, and beside it a smaller stub of a white pillar which was the remains of the previous lighthouse - John Smeaton's lighthouse - which was dismantled some time in the late 19th Century and rebuilt on Plymouth Howe where you can visit it today.
But there were two earlier lighhouses before Smeaton's - no remains of which now survive. The first was built in 1696 by a guy called Henry Winstanley, and looked less like a lighthouse than a gothic folly. Legend has it that when people told him it was "the wrong shape" he'd throw out all his toys and say that if any storm were liable to destroy it, he wished he could be present to observe it. He had his wish: during the Great Storm of 1703 the lighthouse collapsed with Winstanley inside it. And that was the end of both Henry Winstanley and his lighthouse.
The second lighthouse - built in 1708 by John Rudyard - has an equally colourful story. When it came to lighthouses, Rudyard had more of a clue than Winstanley, and his tower (though made mostly out of wood) stood for nearly 50 years. However in 1755 it caught fire. The 94 year old lighthouse keeper Henry Hall attempted to stop the fire, but ended up swallowing molten lead dripping from the roof. However he did not die immediately and was rescued by a boat from the shore. The lighthouse continued to burn for some time and was eventually completely destroyed.
Henry Hall lived on for several days under the care of a Dr. Edward Spry, who was so astonished that a man should survive ingesting molten lead that he wrote a paper on it to the Royal Society in London. The Royal Society pooh-poohed Spry's paper, saying that it was impossible and (implicitly) that Spry was a liar.
And here we get to the nasty part of this story...
Spry was so angry and determined to be proven right, that he conducted a series of experiments with dogs, pouring molten lead down their throats to prove that they would not necessarily immediately die. Whether he ever made the RS take back what they said about him I don't know, but either way it's a close-run thing between him and Roald Amundsen as to who was the biggest git to poor doggies.
(Tempting though it is I shan't have another rant about Roald Amundsen. I dealt with him in another post.)
On the subject of moltern metal ingestion however, I've heard it said that in 264 the Roman Emperor Valerian, having been captured by the Persians and held in captivity for several years, was finally killed by being made to swallow molten gold. Who knows? - maybe he didn't die straight away either.

P.S. Found this: https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=us0NAQAAIAAJ&pg=PA676&lpg=PA676&dq=dr+spry+lead+dogs&source=bl&ots=irWOPBG7vD&sig=7bmCHUmdn0hlW0MFA5qXHXWY0KE&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiz1tiRzf7KAhXGRhQKHSFTCucQ6AEIMzAD#v=onepage&q=dr%20spry%20lead%20dogs&f=false

Right now, one of the most famous Mormon musicians in the world is Brendan Flowers of The Killers. 
Rather than sell himself as a Mormon musician, he initially sold himself as a musician who just happened to be Mormon. 

You have two entirely separate arguments going on here, bytebear.
Kolob is not a literal star; it is entirely metaphorical, basically a name of Christ. Kolob is used in scripture as a reference to Christ, which fact is missed by many Church members. We agree on #2 (at least on the first part; I have no opinion on the second part). However, your entry into this thread was proclaiming #1, and you have provided not the least shred of evidence to substantiate that opinion except to reiterate that that's how you feel.
That's wonderful and all, and you certainly have my permission to believe as you choose. But when you make a claim on a discussion list, others will expect you to give some sort of evidence or argument or basis past "that's just what I think" -- which they already figured out, based on the fact that you said it. So we continue to ask: Based on what evidence do you claim that a real, literal star that Abraham (through divine revelation) identified as Kolob does not actually exist?

Self quote warning...
...actually...as Kolob is, per the argument being made, literally Christ...we should be worshiping Kolob. 

This is a weird thread. I haven't read it all in detail...but I'm gathering that, apparently, some church leaders are vampires.

After a couple of days of the forum being down, I started getting bored. So... regrettably I went and read a couple of other "LDS" forums, something I had not done before. No, I didn't go to any apparent anti-forums, but rather ones that gave off the initial feel of being in line with the church. 
What gave off the appearance of mainstream LDS teaching quickly turned out not to be. Yikes! The spirit quickly left after half the posters started:
1. Giving advice that members should be praying to Heavenly Mother
2. Read some books by excommunicated members
3. Priesthood authority had left the General Authorities a year ago.
That is about the time I said adios to that and have been waiting for LDS.net to reopen. So... Thank you to LDS.net and the many members here that share church approved doctrine. Funny enough, I'll be speaking in Sacrament fairly soon on "Blessings from Sustaining Church Leaders".
 

I had hoped that my little emoticon would have suggested that I was just having fun and not trying to read anything more into 1/3 other than a coincidence. 

It is always interesting to see the "reality" of everyone else's family dynamics and activity levels. 
I know that it can be easy, especially sitting in sacrament meeting, to look around at others and think: "Wow, their life is all roses" or  "Oh, they have the perfect family". I feel bad for investigators or new members who get trapped into this line of thinking. This thread alone is a demonstration that we all face varying circumstances in our perceived "perfect little families". 
We tend to invite new members over to our house often so they can see a real Mormon Family in action. Yah, they leave with a different understanding of Mormon Families alright. Nothing that a night of spicy food, electronic music, and bad-lip reading videos can't cure... and that is all before we pray for dinner!

You continue to insist that since Joseph Fielding Smith said it in "a book", that it must be doctrine for the whole church. 
We have provided numerous sources, links and quotes explaining otherwise. Did even read the official statement from the church:
" Not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine. A single statement made by a single leader on a single occasion often represents a personal, though well-considered, opinion, but is not meant to be officially binding for the whole Church. "
Who is correct, you or the Church? If you are correct, please show us where JFS declares that his opinion on blood eating found in ATGQ is officially binding for the whole Church. If you can not provide this, then you are the one personally trying to bind something that JFS himself did not do.
 

Hooray, thumbs up to you and your family Mirkwood!

Upon reviewing the thread, and the answers provided you have been provided important aspects to ponder. The discussion here reminds me of a few conversations from the mission with Jehovah Witnesses and their interpretation regarding scriptures mentioned.
I don't believe I can add to what others have mentioned; however, this question you ask, "Would the Lord say.....," and the answer is yes at times the Lord has said to some "do this" and to some "don't do this" while others still choose to "do this" and others "don't do this."  You mention a covenant, and provide the thoughts regarding this covenant, while I pretty sure Joseph Fielding Smith was also familiar with the following verse of scripture, 1 Nephi 17: 2:
Raw meat is surely to be filled with "blood."  The sons of Lehi considered this a blessing of the Lord, despite having lived during the Mosaic Law.  In some cultures, a cup of blood after sacrifice was common, and my thoughts have turned toward this tradition in the Lord's commandment and covenant.  We are not to drink the blood from a sacrifice, or to drink blood as we do water, milk, or any other nutrient liquid.  We know the Children of Israel did in fact eat meat, even in light of this covenant.
I also would caution an absolute mentality of "false doctrine" and "true doctrine" regarding every word spoken by the Lord's anointed, for even the Lord's anointed specified that a prophet is only a prophet when acting as such, and has every right to personal thoughts, teachings, and philosophy.  An intriguing aspect of the Book of Mormon is when Alma is speaking to his sons and says, Alma 40:20:
Although delivered as an opinion, through Alma's personal studies, this thought is now scripture.  Joseph Field Smith shared many things, many things which he believed to be sure and true principles from his personal studies. Example, purchase a copy of "Doctrines and Salvations," as there are many great and wonderful teachings in these books.  Are they all true sayings?  Are they all false, which appears to be a mentality being shared.  They are true or false, and how can a prophet teach false doctrine?  Or simply, we are to do as we have been commanded by prophets, study it out in our mind and then move forward according to our spirit if something is not cannon.  
How many other prophets taught something similar, and have they professed the same, or like others we now have the Word of Wisdom and have received other insights.  Study in your heart, study in your mind, and move forward according to your thoughts, even if others may disagree, while remembering God has given us our agency and to try to force something on someone else is not Heavenly Father's way.

My kids are sitting on the computers next to me, laughing at me as I laugh at your comment. Eye think sew 

And LeSellers has 33 grandchildren, which is 1/3 of 99, the code name of CONTROL's top female agent!
And your list name is Sunday21, which is 1/3 of Tuesday63, which is when I was born!
And you posted this 17 minutes ago, which is 1/3 of 51 minutes, which is 9 (=1/3-2!) minutes less than an hour!
Coincidence? Ha! Eye think knot!

So you're an insane, streaking Mormon?

I have totally unreasonable expectations about Utah.  That's what makes it so much fun every time I'm there. 
I'll be back again next month, and then also for General Conference.
dc

From last year's pew poll.
 
2/3 retention is the general trend across the US for LDS families.
 
You mention a trend away from marriage - this is the case across the US. And although we lead the way in a culture of marriage, we aren't doing as well as we were 7 years ago.
 
And since you mention birth rates, I'll toss this one into the mix as well:

There's no reason to suppose Kolob is Jesus Christ anymore than there is any reason to suppose that the bronze serpant was Jesus Christ. The fact that something symbolizes something else does not make that thing the other thing.

I remember with the last upgrade there were a number of glitches.  Most of them were fixed.  I'm sure as time goes on the glitches will be fixed with this upgrade as well.  We all need a little patience.