lostinwater

Just my opinion, but i think there are plenty of things i think the average member doesn't know that would make their hair curl.  But that could be said about just about everything and everyone out there.
People lie, cheat, steal, manipulate, get depressed, addicted, are bigots, are kind, loving, sacrifice, humble, charitable gentle, and honest - usually all in the course of a single lifetime.  And then, if they can, try and doctor up the records to exclude either all the good or all the bad.  Consistent, sensible narratives are so very alluring.  
Again, just my opinion, but if you believe that any organization or group of people didn't do things that were pretty much unacceptable by any yardstick imaginable, chances are, you just don't know them well enough, or are only listening to the history that one person with a very explicit agenda wants you to hear.  And i think ex-members are absolutely affected by that also.
i'm sad to see books like this one.  It just reinforces the caricatured stereotypes members and ex-members have of one another.  

Some of the best people hurt the worst.  Utterly tragic and so sad.
https://www.legacy.com/obituaries/postregister/obituary.aspx?n=kip-harris&pid=191224833&

I agree with you that at present, this is our situation, but I see no reason why it should continue to be our situation.

I have refrained from responding to this quote, but it has been quoted enough now that I will respond to it. There is some truth in this statement, but overall the idea is invalid.
1) The Pharisees saw what Christ did as "dark." They shunned it.
2) We are to believe truth, even if at first truth appears "dark." If truth appears "dark" or affects us as "dark" then there is something amiss in our lives, not in the truth. The brothers of Joseph saw the truth of Joseph's dream as "dark", even Jacob was at first taken back by his son's dream. They should have believed him, but I guess the irony is that in their disbelief -- what they saw as dark and thus committed darkness -- they brought to pass his dream.
3) Did the Pharisees action "do less wrong to Christ" by seeing his works as darkness? No, when we refuse any truth, even if by mistake, indeed we have done wrong, for there are many who are in life deceived by the craftiness of man to see darkness where there is none, and in the end if they continue that path it isn't good for them.
It is always better, and never good, to forsake or reject truth/light because we feel it is dark. In the end, we hurt ourselves, and create the potential of landing ourselves where Christ is not.

Great points.  Thank-you.
And i meant my comment to be more about ungrateful little whelps like me, for a situation whose dynamics i can maybe, in a tiny way, understand - definitely didn't meant to come across as a criticism or even an attempt to give advice to those whose situational dynamics i know and understand exactly nothing about.

An appropriate ratio for preserving and strengthening the marriage, yes?  I know that!  Such things depend on the quality of the relationship.  If couples have a good and fulfilling one, each spouse has a reserve of love (or trust or commitment or whatever you want to call it).  So if one spouse doesn't do enough, there's a reserve the other draws from.  A track record that supports the notion that "he's not usually like this" or "she must be really stressed right now".  Catching up and getting back into a proper groove is easy.  Healthy marriages seem to do just fine with a ratio of like 5 positive for every 1 negative.
But if there are years of issues, or a serious betrayal or injury, the reserves can be gone.  If trust is lost, stuff like expressing appreciation or apologizing can be seen with legitimate skepticism.  At best, those efforts are like going up to an empty barrel and adding a few drops with an eye dropper.  A ratio here is like 50 positives to one negative, and that one negative better dang well be minor and quickly owned, coupled with genuine apologies and amends.  The offending spouse must repent, rebuild trust, etc.  The offended spouse must heal and forgive and avoid unhealthy stuff like escalating or lashing out or withdrawing or whatever.  When that barrel can't or won't get filled, for whatever reason, that's a dying or dead marriage. 
Well, apologies should happen when someone does something wrong.  Too little indicates an issue, and too often also indicates an issue.  Expressing appreciation/gratitude is either important, or extra important, depending on the one receiving it.  Some folks like/need to hear it occasionally, others want/need those positive contributions more often.
Like Anatess2 says, love is doing whatever best helps your spouse grow closer to God.  Issues come when someone's best efforts aren't enough, either because they're not being made, or they're inadequate compared to the other crap they pull, or the other spouse can't/won't be moved.

i find myself filled with a peculiar mix of surprise and amazement as i realize that most likely, my parents woke up most days, looked at one another and all their kids, and thought "What in the world did i get myself into?  i never signed up for this.  Nobody told me it was really going to be like *this*!"  
i don't know what the appropriate ratio of expressing appreciation to offering apologies is.   But certainly, both are needed.
Edit: i guess i meant to just say that any effort people who are married make, or people who have kids, regardless of ultimate outcome, ought to be acknowledged and appreciated for the massive outpouring of effort it is.  

This is a sensitive topic for me. I have both a severely mentally ill spouse and mother. The rest of the family, my adult children as well, have alienated both my spouse and mother. I am alienated as well as I am fiercely loyal to both. I understand it! Having PTSD (The military doesn't fix what it breaks), I get it. It's a lonely road too. As such, I recognize both my mother and wife are worthy of being love, and they are worthy of compassion and understanding. How I cope with dealing with them at their worst moments is I love and respect them upfront, I make the first move. I also REFUSE to engage, I do not argue back, and I just shrug my shoulders and say "Ok". I will withdraw from that conversation and wait for calmer moments, I believe in my heart that family is forever. While I won't enable destructive behavior, kindness is free. I won't hand you an implement in which to hurt yourself with, but I'll love you fiercely. I'll crawl on my hands and knees through 5 miles of broken glass if I have to in order to get to you if you need me. 
I don't buy into the mantra on social media about voiding people that are toxic. I don't know any perfect people. I do know this, I know how lonely I feel when I am alienated because it's inconvenient to love me, or awkward to love me, I know what it's like to think "No one understand me, no one thinks or feels like I do, no one cares". I'm sure not going to bring someone to tears for that. 
Love your family, we have merely precious seconds to do so, sometimes, not even that. In the end, "All I have is you, all you have is me". It should be known that last year, I lost my younger brother to a drug overdose. Oh dear God, the things I wish I would I would have said to him, how I wish I could have saved a life. I'm done talking about this, it's raining in my eyes and I don't like it. 
Love one another, never quit, never give up. 

Life is pain. Anyone who says differently is selling something.
 
My mom's parents both passed when I was in high school, about two years apart.  My dad's parents have both passed in the last two years.  They both raised seven kids (and had 13 grandkids) with an 8th grade education and one salary.  It's been interesting to compare the similarities and differences between their stories, and I feel like I learned more about them after their death than I did while they were alive.  It's also been interesting to see what their children have done and said to those they love while they are/were grieving and struggling.  Thinking about it, I am often reminded of some lyrics from a song I'll post at the end: "You put on a happy face for everybody new, but the closest to your heart so rarely get the best of you."  It's about how those who know you best know the most painful ways to hurt you, and misery loves company.
When my own parent's divorced, I remember my dad bearing the brunt of the blame because he had cheated on my mom.  As I've grown older, I've obtained insight as to how my mother was not entirely blameless in the situation.  Yes, his extramarital affair was the capstone, but her selfishness and stubbornness made home an unpleasant place for him.  Matters were not helped any by the fact that she insisted on working outside the home.  My dad worked nights because there was a pay differential, and my mom worked for a fast food restaurant, moving her way into management, so her hours were varied.  They were rarely home together, and we were rarely home together as a family.  Maybe once a week.  They worked so hard for all of this money, which was spent how?  On cable, babysitters, and mom's smoking habit.  If she had put half as much effort into being a good wife and mother as she put into being a good employee, they might have been able to make things work.  (Although I often joke it would always be a house divided, since my dad only drinks Coke products and my mom only drinks Pepsi.)  Do I excuse my dad's choices at that time?  No.  Have I forgiven him?  Absolutely.  (Having a wonderful sister come out of the mess certainly helped.)  Do I excuse my mom's lifelong choice to put work above all else (even her own health)?  No.  Have I forgiven her?  Lots of times.  Unfortunately, it's an offense that I have to continuously forgive because it's an offense that is continuously made.  Sometimes it takes longer than others.
 

I never, ever judge people who have found themselves in a toxic place in marriage and seek to escape it.  It's really easy to be on the outside looking in and say "Well, if these people were more devout/patient/mature/spending more time with the Bishop/etc then their lives would be better and marriages wouldn't end."  It's so easy to say that, but it's utter tripe.  Is that statement sometimes true?  Undoubtedly.  Am I wise or knowledgeable enough to tell the difference?  Certainly not.  
A successful marriage, ideally, shouldn't be very hard.  When it is, it takes both parties to make whatever changes are necessary to remedy the trouble.  Sometimes both will and the marriage is saved.  Sometimes neither will and the marriage collapses, hopefully rapidly.  The rest of the time...
The rest of the time is when one party is willing to be humble and make changes, and the other is not.  Then you have an imbalance that is a living hell to the one who's trying, because every day that they spend trying to improve things while the spouse does not feels like another day of being rejected.  It's another day of being told, not in to many words by your spouse, that no, this marriage isn't important enough, or you aren't worth it, for them to make the effort.  Those are the marriages that linger, dying in a horrible agony for everyone concerned (especially the kids) because dragging the giant band-aid slowly across hairy skin somehow feels more noble and righteous than ending things when it's clear they cannot be salvaged.  It's self-flagellation in the name of a sort of faux righteousness.
I speak as the child of such a divorce.  It was obvious to me early on that my parents no longer loved each other.  The open contempt with which my mother spoke about my father was not  lost on my child ears, and the fact that my father generally withdrew to his workshop to watch TV or repair electronics (a side gig he had to earn extra money) meant they only saw each other when they were eating dinner or arguing.  (The dinner table was usually where that started.)  My dad and mom were both at fault, and yet both victims, of a clash of cultures and damage from their own personal experiences and backgrounds that would have meant that yes, the marriage was salvageable but ONLY if they both humbled themselves and made an effort to curb their own toxic behavior toward each other.  At no time that I'm aware of did either of them make such an effort, nor did they seek any marriage counselling.  
By the time we moved into a new house the marriage was in a state of open collapse and I do not have one single pleasant memory involving both of my parents together in that house.  In fact, that's where I first witnessed the physical violence.  
The final divorce came a year or so after that but it had begin years prior.  When I saw the divorce decree I felt relief.  For the first time in my young life I was no longer worried about the arguing between my parents.  No more nights sitting up in the darkness, teeth chattering in fear while listening to the angry voices downstairs.  Of course, the drama was far from over, and I later learned what it's like to be a pawn on a chessboard created by divorce lawyers and resentful former spouses.  
Statistics tell us that the children of divorce usually become divorcees themselves.  I am a supporting example of that statistic though my own experience was very different.  My wife suffered from Narcissistic Personality Disorder although it was several years before I knew that.  I'm not claiming to be completely in the right when it comes to the drama in our marriage.  I made more than my fair share of poor choices.  I will, however, claim honestly to be the one trying to be humble, open and willing to make changes to improve the relationship not only for our kids but for us.  I agreed to counselling not only as a couple but on my own.  I worked on my flaws and issues but progress was slow because I was truly going it alone.  Being a sufferer of NPD, my wife was unwilling to get her own counseling, and often used our join counselling sessions as a way to play the victim and insist that everything would be absolutely fine if  only *I* would stop being a bad husband.  At first, the counselor was neutral but gradually as I humbly admitted my flaws and my wife did not, began to get a picture of our marriage that gave her the impression that yes, I was in fact the cause of everything.  
[But wait, Unixknight,] you say, [isn't it possible that you WERE the guy at fault for everything?  I mean, isn't that possible?]
I actually did think so at the time.  I took all the blame, the criticism, the recrimination... even though I was confused.  When did I realize that this was unfair?  It was when my wife told the counselor that she wanted another baby and I was holding out.  When asked why, I answered:  "Because we live in her parents' basement.  We have very little space as it is, and I just don't think we have room for another child.  I'd like another, but I think we need to move out into a larger home first."  At which point this counselor, who was fully on my wife's side by this point, looked me straight in the eye and said "Why are you giving your wife an ultimatum like this?"
At that point I realized there was no objectivity here.  I did still continue to see my own counselor but while it was helping me to grow and heal as a person, it was actually causing greater friction in the marriage, because it was becoming more and more clear to me that things were toxic and dysfunctional in that  marriage.  When I asked my wife to see a counselor on her own, as I was doing, she refused.  When I begged her, she refused.  When I asked her, in the name of saving our marriage, to go to a counselor, she refused.  It was also around that time that I managed to get her to admit that she was deliberately trying to push my rage button to the point where I would become  physically violent toward her. 
[Hold on, Unixknight.  That's absurd.  Why would anybody WANT to be physically assaulted?]
You see, she loved to be the victim and that would have been a magnificent way to get lots and lots of sympathy and attention, something NPD sufferers crave.  At that point I had a decision to make.  Do I remain in this toxic situation, and possibly eventually cross a line that I swore to myself I absolutely never would?  Which would happen first, the marriage improving, or my being arrested for domestic violence?  The divorce followed soon after that.  I know my flaws but I have never raised a hand to her or anyone else close to me in anger.  I would NOT allow her to turn me into that.  No way.  Living with her was turning me into the worst version of myself and I had to stop it before things got any worse.
The instant I'd moved out, she and her parents took my kids and they all moved to another state because of better tax laws.  I didn't get a say.  I also was not in a position to battle for custody of the kids and so, remembering what it was like to be a chess piece, opted instead to focus on my relationship with the kids rather than make them feel like they were in a tug-of-war. 
Today, all three of our kids from that marriage are adults, and are co ping with their own emotional damage from being raised by a person with NPD.  My daughter is even on antidepressants and her counselor has directly connected her emotional damage to her mother.  The boys are older and rather less affected, because they were able to understand better what was happening and were close enough to me that I could mitigate the damage somewhat by being there for them and reassuring them.  My daughter and I have that now as well, but she had to overcome years of brainwashing by her mother before she realized what the actual situation was.  She left my house on Christmas with an "I love you," and subsequently left her mother's with a "Merry %@#!&! Christmas." because of an argument where my ex started cussing at her for making the dog bark.  
(No, really, that's what  happened.)
So there are some who would say, and have said to me, that we should have saved the marriage but were too self-centered and immature, especially me since I was the one that pulled the trigger on the process.  Well, I just ignore that because it's ignorant.  When you're willing to make the effort to fix things but the other person is not, it's like being a prisoner.  It not only causes you massive emotional damage but it had a tendency to damage the children as well.  Severely.  Catastrophically, in some cases.  I recall a song written by Kenny Loggins to his daughter when he divorced her mom, and it is uncanny how well it could fit my daughter.  The refrain goes:
"I did it for you, and the boys, because love should teach you joy and not the imitation that your momma and daddy tried to show you.
I did it for you, and for me, because I still believe there's only one thing that you can never give up and never compromise on, and that's the real thing baby."
So, badly damaged, emotionally wrecked and just plain broken, I met my current wife.    She too has issues but it seems her broken pieces fit my broken pieces like puzzle pieces pretty well.  We've sustained each other and healed each other, and have both grown.  Her relationship with my kids from the previous marriage is strong.  Just last night she and my daughter went out to a painting class together while my future son-in-law worked on building some playground stuff for my little ones in my backyard.  
Do I regret my decisions?  Not even a little.  Not even the one to marry my first wife, because out of that marriage came three excellent people who I have the honor of being a father to.  And my current marriage?  Well, we've been together now for longer than my first marriage lasted (which was 12 years.)  We have 3 kids and will probably have one more soon.  The thought of ever divorcing my wife is unthinkable.  We've had our trials and drama but never even came close to splitting up.  Also, I happen to have a little letter in my filing cabinet from a certain group of 3 men from Salt Lake City telling me I'm all clear to get sealed to her.  So I take it that, whatever mistakes I've made in the past, the Lord approves of how I'm living now.
Apologies for the wall of text.  I just felt like for any of my post to make sense the rest needed to be there.  
Wisdom.  And I'd add to that, we have our own burdens and trouble to help remind us to be humble. 

Funny how much I can sympathize with the various struggles these guys experience. My life is wonderful, but it would be so much better if I were less of an idiot. And to be fair, my wife has her off moments, as well. Some seem to find their way through the crapstorm while others get engulfed by it. Not sure what to make of it all.
It does make me think that our perspective on life and love is terribly short-sighted. My brother's first wife seemed like a walking nightmare. Her childhood included (it was whispered) molestation and outright sexual encounters with her father. I felt very sorry for her, but her actions were such that I have not harbored warm, fuzzy feelings toward her through the years. When interacting with my nieces (her daughters), I have been reminded of her mental disorders. How much differently our Father in heaven and our Savior see her. How much differently I would see her if I were a better man.
I don't really want to lament or engage in public self-flagellation. Rather, in reading NT's stories, I recognize a thread of commonality in the human experience. Those people we admire most and whose lives seem so beautiful have also had to deal with these same basic issues. Somehow, they've just dealt with them better than others. (And I'm not talking about being raped by your father. I'm talking about the more mundane issues and "baggage" we all carry around and deal with.) Learning to effectively deal with such matters is surely one part of our purpose here.

Here are some random stories from five guys I've come to know in real life, in the last few years.  People tend to put their best foot forward, but I've come to know the rest of the story of these struggling dudes.   
Lane is divorced, and has primary custody of their special-needs teen daughter.  Lane and his wife fought for years, decided on a divorce, but called off the plan after their daughter reacted very badly to the notion.  Things got worse for several years, and they lawyered up and divorced.  Now, a few years after that, Lane tells me it would have been better for everyone involved if they had gone through the divorce the first time, rather than dragging it out.  He weathered Christmas ok, it was her turn to have the daughter, so he went and stayed with family.
Bob is emotionally unhealthy.  At the time I met him, he was trying to follow a program for codependent husbands called "No more mister nice guy", about healthy ways to claim dignity and refuse to accept being treated badly by your wife.  As he goes through various programs and counseling, he is trying to work on his issues.  His wife has filed, and they are currently lawyered up and going through the process.  He is trying hard to draw healthy lines between his crap to fix, and his wife's crap she must fix.  To know the difference between what it looks to pursue his wife out of love, or pursue her out of a desperate clingy brokenness.  As she refuses to follow through on various agreements, he spends energy trying to find the motivation to do his part.  Last I heard, his wife was planning to file a motion to postpone the next step in the divorce, because apparently she was seeing a change in him.  Their kids are teens, seem to be adjusting ok to their parents' drama.
James' wife, after soul searching and talking with counselors and the bishop and seeking answers in the temple, has filed for divorce.  Both James and his wife grew up with very bad role models on how husbands and wives should behave.  James is broken, and he knows it. He can't for the life of him figure out how to be emotionally healthy.  He tells of a time when his wife kicked him to the couch until she saw some positive change in him, any positive change.  After she had gone to bed, he stood in the bedroom doorway for like 20 minutes, unable to say anything, unable to either go in or go away, paralyzed by an emotion he still can't identify.  He sort of does stuff like that.  She has seen small bits of health from him, whenever his back is against the wall, but as soon as he's safe he goes back to his normal.  James figures his most likely option to win her back, is to go through with the divorce, and then show his (ex)wife he can be healthy even though there's no pressure on him.  They just made it through their first step of the legal divorce process.  They had a good talk for two hours afterwords, then went home and back to business as usual - distance and proceeding to separate.  No lawyers here.
J.R. and his wife were both broken when they met, and got married for the wrong reasons.  As he tells the story, he spent 20 years believing she was the enemy, staying at a safe distance from her, blaming her for the distance, before he finally learned to deal with his traumatic childhood baggage.  He's heard stories about marriages where one spouse in an alcoholic, and the drunk gets sober, and the dynamic changes and the healthy spouse can't/won't heal, and the marriage just doesn't survive. He sees analogies in his life: she's now the one distant, rejecting, blaming, withholding.  In his words, he got them there, she's keeping them there.  His kids and wife are openly hostile to him, usually rejecting, sometimes cruel.  Quick to claim harm or hurt, glacially slow to see good.  J.R. wonders if he could have a more positive impact on his family if he were out of the house, and with every painful story he shares with someone, he's got one less bishohp/counselor/sponsor/spiritual confirmation urging him to stay married.  He tries to see Christmas in a good light - there was a 3-4 day break in the usual faultfinding and criticism and distance.
Roy finds his wife is treating him unacceptably.  Yelling, blaming, accusing, etc.  Roy has filed for divorce twice because of this, cancelling his divorce plans when his wife capitulates and promises to do better.  He's now filed a third time.  He reports his wife reacted with anger and refusal to put up with this any more.  Roy strikes me as half the problem, he doesn't seem to have any empathy for his wife.  He considers himself 100% victim, her 100% at fault.  I have a hard time thinking of Roy in a positive light.
It's interesting to see common threads running through their unique and different stories.  All of them have been to counseling, some of them years and years of it - both couples and individual.  Most are Christian of one stripe or another, some very devout.  
Getting to know these guys makes me wonder about everyone else.  How many of us could write a paragraph about ourselves containing this much pain and trouble?  Is it all of us?  Just a few of us?  
Anyway, just getting thoughtful at the end of 2018.  All that advice we get about being slow to judge because we never know the burdens another is bearing, is better advice every time I hear it.  

First, i am very sorry for your client.  That's devastating.  And i don't claim to understand how it feels for you.
But sexual meat market, filthy sex-crazed ghouls, pederasty, pedophilia, don't care if it's wrong or destructive, sex uber alles, no sexual restraint?  
Are those sentiments any less correct or hurtful than the one that says Oaks has blood on his hands for doing what he feels is right?
i mean, if this is the kind of tension between the two sides of this issue, then it's no wonder that people are taking their own lives.  It's like dropping someone in no-man's land during a war.  Does it really matter who started shooting first?  Or does anyone really know which side's bullet did the killing?  Or maybe they got clipped from both sides.  Does any of that change that they're dead?  
Maybe the people caught in between will only stop dying when both sides quite trying to kill the other one.  Because you know, the gays and the Christians have both been here for thousands of years.  And the only thing our indignation has purchased so far is an increased amount of hate, a decreased amount of understanding, and an escalating number of dead bodies and human tragedies. 

When our daughter died my husband’s ex-wife came to the funeral. It made it uncomfortable for us and other family members. After that my husband wrote an email to his ex detailing certain boundaries he would like to see implemented. In the letter he requested that she not attend any more funerals of his family.  He then explained that it was uncomfortable when she attended our daughter’s funeral, and told her the reason he did not attend her mother’s (ex-mother-in-law) was so she and her family could grieve without any distractions. My husband’s son came from out of town to attend his grandmother’s funeral, and we would have loved to have seen him while he was in the area, but didn’t want to take away from their family time and mourning together. It just seemed inappropriate. So we did not visit him while he was here.
As to forgiving the ex-wife, forgiveness does not require you to be in the presence of someone who has been a toxic entity in your life. It does mean you should be civil, especially since children are involved. But, forgiveness does not mean you trust that person. And, unfortunately, we do not forget, even if we would like to. We have to protect ourselves from a toxic person. And, even though she may have been toxic in your personal life, doesn’t mean she is toxic to your children or other family members. It becomes a fine line that needs to be tread, and can be difficult.
My husband has been divorced for nearly 40 years and there are still consequences and repercussions from the prior marriage.  Sigh. There are times when we just ignore her as much as possible without being rude or uncivil. We try to be Christlike, but that does not mean she is welcome at husband’s family functions.  My stepdaughter would like to bring her mother to every activity we have. That’s another story. My husband has also needed to talk to his daughter about boundaries. Good luck!

True, of course. But we have biological mechanisms to correct mutations, so the effective mutation rate is pretty low and appears to be predictable. (The rate of mutations, not the mutations themselves, which by definition are not predictable.) The point is that our Y chromosome "backbone", the basic Y chromosome underlying all humans, must converge on an individual some time in the past—200,000 or 300,000 years ago, according to the article. Even with mutations, there is a recognizable core of "human" Y chromosome inherited from "chromosomal Adam". Same with "chromosomal Eve" and her mitochondrial DNA.

At the risk of sounding obtuse, i am pretty sure news-worthiness is not a criteria used in selection of content to display on most news sites.  
The articles that lead to the most clicks right now and in the future get put up.  
And i could be misunderstanding, but does anyone's mtDNA or yDNA have a time to live of more than 1?  Maybe, if you're really lucky, your child's mt/Y DNA is 100% like yours.  But most likely, it is 100% less a handful of mutations.  And if you don't have a male/female child, go a generation or two back, reversing those couple of mutations a couple times, and there is someone with your same mt/y DNA.  Occasionally, you had a very successful combination of mutations, which were able to perpetuate - and those are the haplogroups.  
And i guess the problem with tracing anything back, is that you've got to decide where to stop natural processes and call in that which cannot be explained.  Most Christians regress to back to mt-MRCA and call her Eve and to Y-MRCA and call him Adam before calling it a day.  And scientists take that a lot further back - but eventually dead-end themselves, too.  
Or such is my understanding at least.  

That's rough, brother. Not sure what advice to give, but you have my sincere condolences on your brother's passing.
What does your brother's widow think? It's ultimately her decision. If she says she doesn't want her there, then it's decided; just let your ex-wife know as politely as you can that her presence would be somewhat disruptive, so thanks for offering to come but no thanks. If your sister-in-law wants her there (which seems highly unlikely), then it's decided, and you need to find some way to make peace with your ex-wife's presence.
If, as seems likely to me, you sister-in-law says she doesn't care, then you will need to look into your own heart and examine your own motives. Perhaps the best thing to do is to try to figure out whether your children are better of with or without their mother there.
If your children weren't all that close to their uncle and the funeral is mainly about your family's (read: your) private grief, then you need to determine whether disinviting her from the funeral and spending the time grieving your brother without her there is worth the possible bad feelings and repercussions that may arise in the future when dealing with her regarding your children.
This is all very obvious. Sorry I don't have any great insights. Best of luck to you.

To further elaborate:  There are CLEAR standards which are outlined in the scriptures of what constitutes a decent individual.
Do not steal, Do not cheat, do not commit adultery, etc. etc. etc.
Christ laid out even further restrictions for which we should all strive for.   Do not be angry with your brother, do not judge unrighteously, do not look after strange flesh and lust after it.  Your problem @Godlessis that the world is so wicked today that no one wants to admit they are a wicked, fallen, sinful individual and that we are all just "good people" who "make mistakes".
Yet " And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God. "
There is a lot of wisdom in what Christ is saying.  Mortality is a constant struggle, a constant battle against the natural man.  No, I don't buy into your vapid, hedonistic argument that to call sin sin, to call wicked wickedness, to call evil evilness is to mean what you said.  Your argument is just a lie from Satan, a way to deceive others into thinking there is no need for change, no need for constant evaluation of your own life.  And to which I'm very grateful for one who atoned for my sins as I continually make the climb to refine myself.
But you do you . . .I'm surprised so many "saints" are taken in by the arguments of one who openly proclaims they are "godless".  But it is the last days . . .when good is called evil and evil called good.

@Grunt
It's very kind of you to care about your friend as you do.
All this is just my opinion.  i guess that's always true, but it feels correct to acknowledge it every time.
If we are God's children (i assume your friend believes this), then unless God is the most narcissistic, self-serving, jerk of a parent, then your friend is not going to be consigned to hell for doing their best with the knowledge they have.  
It would be like a parent keeping notes on how many times a child fell down trying to learn to walk so they could punish them later.  And not just punish them, but punish them without end.  That isn't God.  That's the idea used by enterprising churchmen to empty the pockets of their parishioners that's been peddled as something way above it's pay grade.
If they draw closer to God by getting baptized, then go for it!  i mean, isn't that what religion is for, anyways?
Edit: if this is offensive in any way, please let me know, and i'll remove it.  Wasn't my intent, but i can see how it might be.

These ones are particularly appropriate for tonight. I meant to get them up a bit earlier, but my computer was feeling uncooperative this afternoon. Sorry.
 
 

This isn't really relevant to @Just_A_Guy's point. He's talking about the frame of mind that the homosex advocates have convinced society at large to have. Specifically: Sexual orientation is the true self. One cannot be happy not being one's true self. Not giving into this is oppressive. Etc.
There are pamphlets?
Well...yeah. Isn't that kind of the point of religion? We need to be a certain way (like Jesus, in the case of Christianity).
Why, may I ask, is it only tragic for homosexuals that religion suggests they'll be happier becoming like Christ? Why isn't that true of all tendencies toward the natural man?
Who isn't letting homosexuals exist?
Those are the only choices, huh?
I think not.
This, of course, is one of the core lies being told my the pro-homosex camp. If you preach against my natural tendencies you're hurting my spiritual health. I ask again, however, why does this seem to only apply to homosexuality and other sexually related tendencies (except, of course, any tendencies the world still deems wrong, pedophilia, bestiality, incest, etc.) But how is it different for someone to preach against one thing they consider sin and not crush someone's soul, but preaching against another thing they consider sin does crush someone's soul? Why is it not soul crushing to preach against bad health practices, stealing, lying, lust, hetero fornication, adultery, murder, anger, rage, unkindness, jealousy, etc? Why aren't you as worried about the poor soul who's natural tendency is to be jealous of their neighbor when someone preaches that they should work to overcome those feelings? Poor...poor souls who's natural tendency, and therefore emotional well being and spiritual health is, clearly, being crushed by anti-jealousy dogma?
Of course this is nonsense. Yes, of course it can be difficult to hear that one's natural struggles are a sin. But when I hear something I struggle with is a sin and it makes me feel bad it typically buoys up my determination to improve. Just A Guy is claiming, and rightfully so, that if the world was preaching at me that buoying up my determination to improve was wrong...because I had no reason to improve...had no ability to improve...was permanently set at odds against the religion I practiced...and that the ideas of true change, true choice, true faith and trust in God, and true repentance were actual impossibilities, then perhaps I wouldn't feel so buoyed up. Because, after all, the promises of the gospel are as important as the sanctions. The world and the homosex camp is out there promoting the evils of religious sanctions with absolutely no understanding of the promises. What I cannot fathom is how those who should very well understand those promises are here in this forum (and elsewhere) arguing on behalf of those who don't understand them.
Give me a freaking break. No one has even begun to suggest anything of the sort, ever.
Ridiculous.
I seriously doubt anyone thinks that's the only motivating factor. But on the other hand you get people arguing that homosexuality somehow has no relationship to sex at all. The motivating factors are irrelevant to the reality that if you take "sex" out then it's not homosexual. An effeminate man who dresses nice, enjoys musical theater, and takes pleasure in baking and home decoration is still heterosexual if he wants sex with women. It's only the desire for sex with men that makes one ultimately homosexual.
Until one desires sexual activity with someone of the same sex, however, one isn't homosexual. Claiming otherwise is buying into a lie.
If what's mutually exclusive? What's "it" referring to?
What are you talking about? What is the "that" here?
So if Hitler had won the Nazi's didn't set out to rule a continent and exterminate ethnic “inferiors” afterall?

Thank-you for saying this.  Agree with this sentiment completely.  

While listening to my Christmas music on shuffle tonight these two songs from The Forgotten Carols really struck me, and I felt the need to share them here tonight.