Budget

He hasn't even been in for 6 months - so really think a tally of promises kept is premature.  This is a marathon, not a sprint.

There was a lady in a small branch on my mission who would always show up to church with a big gulp for her and a big gulp for her son every Sunday. One fast Sunday she bought 2 dozen donuts for everyone in the Ward xD 

I hate these kinds of comparisons because SOUTH KOREA AND AMERICA HAVE COMPLETELY DIFFERENT CULTURES.
Yes, there are more school hours per day in South Korea than the US.  But no, Asian parents don't send their kids to school for 8 hours of the day so they can get them out of their hairs even if all they're learning is gender identity and social justice.  No, they go to school for 8 hours to learn to build a bike, learn music (related to math), learn a martial art, get military training, have 3 math classes, a couple of science classes, a couple of language classes etc. etc.  So yes, American schools is a vacation compared to the rigors of Asian education.  But no, it's not because South Korea have more school days.  It's because they have higher quality curriculum.
And yes, in South Korea, a lot of high school kids are in school for 16 hours a day!  But no, it's not because their parents just drop them off for state-run babysitting.  These parents are very involved with their kids' education so that when the regular class is over they send them to more schooling to learn a trade.  For example, KPop school is very popular there, where a teen-ager is groomed to be a Kpop star or work in the Kpop business.  Very competitive school with difficult entry requirements.  Anyway, these kids graduate from high school with a leg-up on the competition for college placement plus a money-making skill so they can pay for it.
In the US, more public schooling is more stupid schooling.  And yes, I much more agree with @Vort's sentiment of it being satanic than your lackluster attempt at Asian comparison.  If Seattle public school had the same quality education as South Korean school, I wouldn't have a problem with a longer school year.
 

This is literally right out o W. Cleon Shousen's book, "The Naked Communist.". In it he lists 45 goals of the Communist party.  One of the goals is for the State to take children away from the corrupting influence of their parents.  A couple of the goals no longer apply, but the communist have achieved or have almost achieved all of their goals.

It's possible that you're my home teacher! No offense, between work and kids and house work and yard work and callings and in laws and grandparents.... any free time I have I'd rather not spend with ht/vt. Nothing personal, a smile or nice conversation at church is fine.

Ward beggar.

There's more than one way to ht/vt.  
~ My husband sends a letter every month to one of his people (inactive, divorced...).  
~ Maybe you can let them know that you're great at fixing cars if theirs ever breaks down (or maybe you have handyman skills...).  
~ Maybe you can support them in their callings (I've actually told my vt that's what I'd prefer over a visit cause that would mean more - they still don't do it though ).  So join the choir if you have to or offer to set up/take down after a RS activity.  
~ Maybe promise to keep a visit to 20-30 minutes tops (I had one that stayed for 2+ hours).  
~ Maybe they need to be reassured that you won't bring your wandering kids over (had that happen, too).
~ Maybe you need to tell them you won't ask any nosy/probing questions (been there and don't like it).
chi 7.4.1 - Where possible, home teachers visit members in their homes at least monthly. Home teachers may also find other meaningful ways to watch over and strengthen the families they are assigned. For example, they may render service to the families or contact family members by mail or telephone.
 

I think many of us are relieved when we get that response rather than the endlessly unreturned phone calls!

For all we know, Mallori is a 16 yr old girl.

Bini,
Sometimes, separation can be a doorway into a beautiful marriage if done the right way. The fear of facing things on your own is natural, separation from spouse is not a natural thing, hence the confusion and pain that goes alone with it. At this moment, don't rush to a decision, lots of people will tell you don't just stand there, do something, when in truth, the best option is to stand there and do nothing. 
There is hope, water it and it will grow. 

I'm sorry you're in this situation.  As far as being scared - that's understandable.  Focus on your strengths and get help where/when you need it.  Sending love. 

Heh.  They made me financial clerk, so I do tithing now.  I just finished a four hour financial audit.  The stake auditor is a cop, with years of criminal auditing experience.  It was a fun audit.  He discovered we wrote a check that reimbursed a member $7.82 for cheese, when they only spent $6.82.  We were dinged for that. 

Hi Danny - i don't give money to the Mormon church any more either.  When my mind is right, i try not to judge either side.  i mean i could (and too often do), but really, someone else could accurately accuse me of similar wastefulness of God's Gifts to me - my wastefulness just looks a bit different.
And i do think the Church does a lot of good.  i have had some good friends get help from the Church - so i am glad for the tithing money that helped them.
Anyways, my recommendation is that you avoid giving it to an organization.  Giving it yourself to people whose problems you understand and whose pain you see and help prevent from continuing is really rewarding.  And, giving it in little chunks helps to combat materialism.
i believe you have the opportunity to touch people that the church - or any other organization for that matter - just wouldn't - because your sphere of influence is different.
And i just can't believe that Jesus would do anything but smile when we give part of ourselves along with our money.  And that in no way is meant to put down people who donate tithing - because surely there is a lot faith and very personal sacrifice involved for people who are paying it.
Thanks for your goodness in wanting to help so many people.  Not many people could part with that amount of money (myself included) - so is very impressive.
 
 

Keep in mind that even if he loses faith, he's still your husband. So you can still choose to see the good in him. You can still be happy in your marriage. Recognize that this is your husband's faith crisis, not yours. While you can help him, you shouldn't have to worry about the end result -- just take comfort in knowing that Jesus knows your pains, and take comfort in knowing that your husband isn't leaving you -- you can still have a fulfilling and happy relationship with your husband. The people that I've known who have left the church because they disagreed with its truth claims have largely stayed good people. They still see good in the church and still agree with many of its values ("love they neighbor", "be a good father", "stay loyal to your spouse" etc.) Yes, it will be harder to take the children to church, since often the one who leaves the church decides that they won't attend anymore -- towing the kids to church all by yourself can be a difficult thing, but it could definitely be worse. 
Overall, please try to support your husband, and don't let his religious beliefs (or lack thereof) turn into a wedge that drives you apart. It sounds like he still loves you very much. "Count your blessings, name them one by one..."
Pray for strength, God knows your situation. I have a strong conviction that you can feel relief from this stress if you lay your burden on the Savior. 

Poor children (the missionaries).  I took the sisters out to dinner some night last summer, and all I could think was, "Holy cow, they're young."  (Apparently I got old at some point.)

Not really, the trend to not use a cross or crucifix didn't really start happening until the 20th century.
The Mormon Cross Taboo had the same basis as the nineteenth century Protestant rejection of the symbol: a desire to disassociate themselves from the Catholic Church. Contrary to the assumptions of many historians today, however, the Mormon aversion to the cross was more a late development that occurred around the turn of the twentieth century, and by this time, Protestants had already widely accepted the symbol.
It is true that early Mormons echoed many of the same anti-Catholic polemics that concurrently circulated throughout Protestant America. Nevertheless, early Mormons initially avoided condemning the cross, and did so for three fundamental reasons: (1) The early Mormon involvement in folk magic and (2) Freemasonry both encouraged the use of the cross; and (3) the pre-Columbian cross validated the authenticity of the Book of Mormon.
The influence of the first two factors lost their strength as later generations turned away from past involvement in folk magic and Freemasonry. The third factor alone was insufficient for Latter-day Saints to preserve the general acceptance of the cross. This became true particularly as two waves of anti-Catholicism hit Utah, the first at the turn of the twentieth century and the second at mid-century. Attitudes toward the cross polarized in Utah at the grass-roots level, manifesting rather loudly in 1916 when many vocal Saints protested their leader's petition to erect a cross monument on Ensign Peak. A generation later, President David O. McKay officially institutionalized the taboo into the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, defining the cross as inappropriate for members, claiming that it was a purely "Catholic form of worship".
The lateness of this evolution was largely forgotten. Church authorities and apologists have since persisted in echoing early nineteenth century Protestant anti-Catholic polemics to justify their aversion. These arguments - coupled with the assumption that the rejection of the cross has always existed in Mormon culture - helped to perpetuate the aversion into the twenty-first century.....
....Negative attitudes toward the cross in the LDS Church have softened since the second half of the 20th century, so much so that it would be surprising (if not shocking) to hear today's Church authorities disparage the symbol as the "mark of the Beast", "symbol of the Devil", or "image of the Great and Abominable Church." However, does this shift indicate a trajectory leading to the taboo's ultimate extinction? As old habits die hard, resistance to change is even greater when certain practices are institutionalized, rationalized, and declared true by Church authorities. It may indeed be that Church leaders will eventually decide that there is no real doctrinal or revelatory basis for the taboo, and hence feel inclined to weigh the costs against the benefits. Until this happens, interfaith tension over this issue will likely persist and interfere with the Church's efforts to be accepted in the Christian denominational family. Many new converts will also remain disheartened by the taboo, and feel compelled to hide jewelry, discard decorations and pack away cherished heirlooms that were once used to express[ed] their faith in and love for Jesus Christ.
(Banishing the Cross - The Emergence of a Mormon Taboo by Michael G. Reed, pages 145-148)
M.

In my house, I have a statue of Ganesha, a statue of Buddha, the Lord's Supper all in the same room.
I have a crucifix in my bedroom and a big cross-stitch of an angel with wings.
I used to sometimes wear my crucifix pendant but not too much anymore because I got that crucifix for a Catholic devotion.  I don't wear my scapular anymore since I got baptized LDS because that scapular is also a devotion.
So yeah, it's not so much the "stuff".  It's the purpose behind it.
Catholics don't wear sacred religious symbols for "jewelry".  They wear it for devotions in the same manner that LDS wear garments.  That's why Catholics got upset over Madonna - raised a Catholic - when she used the crucifix for earrings in one of her music videos.  It's not an approved manner of devotion as the crucifix should only be worn as a pendant.

This might be misleading.  Baptized members are expected to tithe and pay at least a fast offering.
Welcome, @limichelle, glad you're here!

I denounce anyone that judges a person's worth by skin color or sex.
This includes all groups and individuals, who have such attitudes, and is not limited to just the white supermacist/neo-nazis organizations

Well, as I'm brown, I don't need to.  If you haven't noticed, only White People can be racists and neo-nazis.  They're the only ones that need to publicly denounce it.  Black or Brown or Yellow ones can say the most racist things and not have to worry about it.   

Sigh.  He has repeatedly rebuked, denounced, distanced himself from all these idiots when the media kept on giving these extremists a platform.  Why would you want him to give these idiots a platform???  If I was the one running for President, I'm not even going to honor these idiots with a National mention except one time to state my unequivocal position.  Yet, the media keeps on giving these idiots a voice on the Public Square.
Here.  Watch this video.  Trump over the course of the campaign repeatedly rebuking, denouncing, distancing himself from white supremacists when the media spotlights them. 
 
 
And, after Bannon got appointed, the media spotlights the White Supremacists again.  Trump told them again he doesn't want to be associated with that group.  So, how many times exactly does he have to do this to satisfy you???
https://twitter.com/maggieNYT/status/801126093776449537
 

Maybe you're unaware Godless, but Trump has made national and international news publicly denouncing these people.  If you were aware, any particular reason you're ignoring all that and just looking at his twitter account? 
http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/22/politics/donald-trump-disavow-groups-new-york-times/index.html
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38069469
And just to make a clear point - I don't see you denouncing any white supremacists anywhere.  Care to correct the record?

As a beginner, not knowing anything and starting from zero, I was wondering why I saw over and over to store 50 lb. buckets of wheat and beans.  I remember telling my husband; "What would I do with 50 lbs. of wheat?" and "The kids don't even like beans."  So instead I did what of course what came naturally;  buying extra of what we already used.  Instead of 50 lbs. of hard red wheat, beans and rice I bought extra peanut butter, crackers, pasta, canned foods and granola bars. 
Fast forward about 15 years. 
I TOTALLY store wheat now... and yes I know to use it.
Anyway - I enjoy prep - although we don't have much money to do it on so it's a strict budget, little by little gets the job done.  Although I've taken baby steps over the past 16 years, I got serious about it over the last 5. 
 

Perhaps they are stockpiling it as 'trade and barter' items just in case for the future?  I wouldn't say a word. Not my place to judge.

As a beginner, not knowing anything and starting from zero, I was wondering why I saw over and over to store 50 lb. buckets of wheat and beans.  I remember telling my husband; "What would I do with 50 lbs. of wheat?" and "The kids don't even like beans."  So instead I did what of course what came naturally;  buying extra of what we already used.  Instead of 50 lbs. of hard red wheat, beans and rice I bought extra peanut butter, crackers, pasta, canned foods and granola bars. 
Fast forward about 15 years. 
I TOTALLY store wheat now... and yes I know to use it.
Anyway - I enjoy prep - although we don't have much money to do it on so it's a strict budget, little by little gets the job done.  Although I've taken baby steps over the past 16 years, I got serious about it over the last 5.