old

For whatever it's worth. Do the things that are in the best long-term interest of your wife and your daughter for THEIR sake. Take your own ego, your own self out of it; selfish desires, passions of depression, being low, not feeling good enough etc. Remove all those passions that are clouding your vision. Remove the passion of fear of loss, that if you do this thing or that thing you will lose your wife and lose your daughter. A good leader can NEVER lead when fear of loss clouds his judgement. A good leader is first in control of himself; he is a good following to another leader (find a spiritual father and learn to follow a spiritual father). Pray to God, what is it that I should be doing for the best long-term interest both spiritually and physically for them? And then once you have that vision. Execute on it. Never waver, never doubt, never have fear. Know that what you are doing is out of care for your wife and your daughter, for their long-term best interest. If that requires saying N-O to more money. Then do it. And if the consequences of your actions acting in the best interest for the long-term salvation of your wife and daughter means that your wife tells you "I'm done with you and I'm divorcing you", then STILL do it. Sacrifice yourself for them. And that sacrifice MAY be a sacrifice of letting your wife divorce you due to you standing firm in decisions you make. God willing it won't be and with God's help, your wife will truly understand and know that you are the best representation of Christ in her life and that she will never find anyone else in this world who can reflect the image of God, the image of Christ to her as you are able to do. And God willing and with His help, do that and there is a possibility that she will come running back.

For whatever it's worth (probably less than 2 cents); women respect strong, firm men. Why? Well because instinctively women are the weaker sex. From an ontological perspective both men and women have equal worth in the eyes of God, however God created men to lead as the head and women to follow men's lead as the heart (and when necessary point the head in the correct direction). There are things men do for that are detrimental to their own destruction. There is something as confiding too much in your wife; when that happens the wife feels like a mother rather than a wife. Women want their husbands to LEAD. Leading doesn't mean being a total jerk, abusive, etc. nor does it mean being a doormat. Leading means being out in front, setting the tone, the direction, the vision, the example. It's a heavy responsibility and not one to be taken lightly. This isn't MGTOW 101 b/c just as much as women need men to lead, men need women to follow to be good leaders. Men and women help each other in their God ordained roles and responsibilities. The first thing to being a good leader is learning to lead and not being lead. Learning to solicit feedback from those you lead but not make that feedback the lead. It is about not caring but caring. Leading means you don't really care what they think of you or about you, but that you care about their welfare, their souls. Everything you do is out of care for them, not out of you but that you don't care about how they feel about you. Because a leader cares about the long-term vision sometimes actions and decisions will lead to short-term pain while working for the long-term goal. And sometime when leadership has broken down, those being lead are cynical about the leaders care for them, they are rebellious, they do things to hurt the leader, to tear him down.

It is really about balance. Traditional marriage and relationships has the man as a primary provider and as such a woman should look for a man who can fulfil that role. That is one reason why up until recently there was a much bigger age gap between men and women getting married. The man needed to establish himself to some effect to demonstrate he was worthy of a woman. So a woman can go and try and catch the mid 6 figure income guy . . .but those guys are few and far between, but she could also catch the hard-working guy who provides an average life as well. If she is trying to catch the mid 6 figure guy . . .well she's got a lot of competition, so what does she bring to the table that the guy will say, "I pick you over all the over girls". A pretty face and looks is one, but then there is ability to keep a clean house, take care of kids, etc. Ultimately though, if a man or woman is not looking to God to help bring them together then they are in for a rough life. The income is very temporary, the looks is very temporary, in fact most things in this life are very temporary. The best way is to look to the traditional Christian views on what relationships between men and women should look like and there you will find the best recipe for success.

I thought you weren't LDS anymore?

We see it everywhere the hubris, the egotistical haughty attitude, "oh that will NEVER happen here", we know better than anyone else who has ever lived that's why we allow things that societies have said were wrong and horrific for thousands of years. God will use the wicked to chastise the wicked.

Meh, you only claim to not care b/c your guy isn't in charge. It's all about power. You've admitted to being petty and that in effect whether one side is using the power of the government it doesn't really matter...b/c it's not "your guy". But as soon as "your guy" gets in charge, you'd either a) do the same thing to others or b) moan and groan if it was done to your guy.

100% it isn't the irreligious and the godless that are causing this mess. It's the salt that has lost it's savour.

100%. Politics is downstream from culture.

No apology here. US is a morally bankrupt society that is on fumes...only thing holding it together is the ability for people to make money in the US. It has no cohesive united story that binds people together . . . except money. When the economy and US dollar goes (which is will), the US will tear itself apart. How long will that take?? Whenever the US loses a big war or a big fight with a near peer competitor.

The Hunter Biden vs. Trump is asymmetrical. 1) Trump reimbursed a lawyer who used personal funds to have a porn start sign an NDA. Trump has fully denied having anything to do with a porn star. 2) The FEDERAL GOVERNMENT provided classified briefings to Congress saying the Hunter Biden laptop was Russian Disinformation. The two have literally nothing to do with each other. One is using personal power and the other is using the force of the government. What should really happen is the individuals in the Federal Government who pushed the Russian Disinformation nonsense should go to jail. . . .but Fed. Gov. is never held accountable. Hunter Biden is just a pawn (sadly and I feel for the guy . . .he's a messed up dude from a messed up family), hiss father is the one who should be hauled up on impeachment charges for corruption and selling influence through his son. Hunter Biden . . .his mother is killed in a car wreck and his father is banging some chic prior to his mother's death who his father then marries quickly after the accident...messed up.

People get the government they deserve. Don't be surprised when your guy is locked up b/c someone else decides to be petty.

You should look up Robert's Rules of Order. The original system (which is effectively based off of Robert's Rules of Order), was not a strict majority. It was majority+. Ultimately, any official business has to have AT LEAST 50+1 of the vote. However, business cannot be closed or shut down unless at least 66%+1 say it can be shut down. What this originally meant in practice is that in order to take an actual VOTE on whether to pass a bill, it required 66% of the body to say "yes we want to vote on the bill" and 50% to say "yes the bill should pass". When adhered to what this actually generated were bills more likely to pass with a very strong majority. Changes in the bill would occur to get enough votes to shut down discussion of the bill (requiring 66%) and move it to an actual vote to pass (50%). You do realize that Mike Johnson has passed bills that have not even garnered 50% of the Republican vote right!!! That ain't 1-2 people complaining...that's a MAJORITY of the Republican Congressman saying, NO we shouldn't pass this bill .....and it gets passed anyways b/c Mike Johnson is power-sharing with the Democrats.

I've been in political situations where we didn't have a majority, but had a very strong minority (like 40%) and the majority didn't want to work with us, so we got fussy and whiny. One perspective is they are fussy and whiny and no one wants to work with them b/c of that. OR another perspective is the majority side doesn't want to give any crumbs to the non-majority wing and therefore the non-majority wing becomes fussy and whiny.

old school republicans would rather ally with D than the right; Congress right now is basically power-sharing between Rs and Ds, thanks to Mike Johnson. Literally he has given them control over Congress in exchange for him being Speaker.

Not true; The Supreme Court has routinely engaged in overturning laws that impinge on the 10 amendments. While the 10A originally only applied at the Federal level over time the Supreme Court has ruled that it also applies to State Laws. Therefore, SC could rule on 1A issues (gag orders). 5A issues (why was it not tried at a Federal Level and the retro-active felony charges), 6A issues (denial of move of venue to neutral location) and 8A issues (trying as a felony something that has previously been tried as misdemeanor). The SC does what you say it doesn't do all the time. We will see what happens.

It is not. Do you not understand what homosexual behavior does to the physical body? Anal cancer, anal leakage, throat cancer, extremely high rates of STDs, Grinder ain't named grinder for nothing! The hundreds if not 1000s of sexual partners. Anyone who denies the actual real destruction of the physical body due to homosexual behavior and the mental/spiritual damage due to living such a lifestyle is in utter denial of reality. It's actually quite disgusting that those who advocate the most for these types of behaviors and identities are the ones who care the least about the massive destruction these things do to the individual. It's actually quite demonic; it's very similar to the drugs given to those who are suffering from depression and suicidal thoughts. If you ever look on the actual known side-effects of drugs given to "help" with depression and suicide, the KNOWN side effects are suicidal thoughts!!!! Giving people medicine that has the exact side effect of the very thing they it is supposed to cure...it's almost as if the doctors WANT to kill off those who have depression and suicide. It's the same thing with LGBTQ+; the physical, spiritual, and mental damage of it is massive. Sadly, most of these individuals even prior to engaging in the LGBTQ+ lifestyle/community/identity are already suffering from some form of sexual abuse and trauma...so what does society do???? Encourage them to live a life that introduces MORE sexual abuse and trauma...brillant, just brillant. https://www.arcjournals.org/pdfs/ajad/v3-i2/11.pdf and look up "The Health Hazards of Homosexuality"

Ah...but there is the rub. You claim they are bigoted but if they gain enough sway then you'll be labeled the bigot and their beliefs will be the right/true/compassionate believes. Lol....the utter fickleness of modernity. No wonder people are so confused, up is down, down is up-wait a few years and then up will be up and down will be down. So glad there is something that has been teaching the same faith for 2000 years. I never have to worry about this junk. So nice.

It's all good man. Yeah things can get a little confusing b/c Eastern Orthodox are still catholic but not Catholic; LDS is also catholic-meaning one and the same everywhere. Catholic meaning Latin under the Pope of Rome. Now where it gets really confusing is when you have groups that claim they are Orthodox-Catholic, they have the same rites as Catholics, but do not follow the Pope. Those guys are just on their own and don't have communion with Eastern Orthodox. Then you have Eastern Rite Catholics (Catholics that practice Eastern Liturgy) that are under the Pope and Western Rite Orthodox that practice the Roman/Catholic Liturgies but are Orthodox and not under the Pope but in communion with the rest of Eastern Orthodox. The Orthodox-Catholic, Eastern Rite Catholics and Western Rite Orthodox are all fairly small groups though...and mostly found in places like Poland/Ukraine where East & West meet.

But if a black man marries a white woman, is the black man the slave or the white woman? Or is it that the black man gets to make the white woman his slave as reparations? This is wild; I've never heard this; questions, questions.

Oh wild...so it's kind of like the whole change from being "color-blind" as a liberal/progressive viewpoint to being "color-blind" is right-wing, bigots? Wild...... society is so fickle.

Now that I haven't seen. I'm very much intrigued about this, where do I go to find progressives opposed to interracial relationships? Strangeness.

Most definitely NOT Catholic-thank you very much! Catholics are about as woke as ..... :-). Eastern Orthodox, much different. No such thing as purgatory, nor indulgences, etc. I won't throw punches. There are many really, really good decent Mormons/LDS. LDS beliefs are what they are and they allow what they allow. Not my fight anymore and it doesn't affect me. They are more than welcome to have transgender cabins at youth camps and have openly homosexual missionaries. I mean I wish they wouldn't for the greater whole of Christendom-but they gonna do what they gonna do. I wish the UMC didn't have female pastors and openly LGBTQ+ leaders; but it is what it is. I truly feel for those who are doing everything they can to live traditional Christian lives in a crazy world where they are much confused in their own religion. I wish it weren't the case.

One of the better writings on the topic: https://stjohndc.org/en/orthodoxy-foundation/christian-understanding-homosexuality For anyone who tries to twist Christianity into saying Christianity is always changing. Pretty obvious what Christianity believed, really early on. The Holy Fathers of the first centuries of Christianity bluntly describe the world they sought to transform. St. Cyprian of Carthage writes: “Oh, if placed on that lofty watch-tower, you could gaze into the secret places – if you could open the closed doors of sleeping chambers and recall their dark recesses to the perception of sight – you would behold things done by immodest persons which no chaste eye could look upon; you would see what even to see is a crime; you would see what people imbruted with the madness of vice deny that they have done, and yet hasten to do – men with frenzied lusts rushing upon men, doing things which afford no gratification even to those who do them.” St. Cyprian of Carthage, “Letters” c. 250 AD St. John Chrysostom writes: “All of these affections [in Rom. 1:26-27] . . . were vile, but chiefly the mad lust after males; for the soul is more the sufferer in sins, and more dishonored than the body in diseases. The sins against nature are more difficult and less rewarding, since true pleasure is only according to nature. But when God abandons a man, everything is turned upside down! . . . A murderer only separates the soul from the body, whereas these destroy the soul inside the body . . . There is nothing, absolutely nothing more mad or damaging than this perversity.” St. John Chrysostom, “Homilies on Romans” And in words which surely must seem, to us, prophetic, St. John in another place writes: “The worst of it is that such an abomination is committed boldly and that the monstrosity becomes the law. Nobody nowadays fears, nobody blushes. They boast and they laugh at these actions. The people who abstain appear stupid and they who condemn are regarded as fools. If they appear to be weaker they are crushed with blows. If they are stronger, people laugh, people mock them and make many jokes about them. They have no redress in tribunals or in law.” (Against the Opponents of Monastic Life, III.8) Perhaps there is also some consolation here for us, that the worldly attitudes against which St. John preached sound so familiar to us. Concerning those in Holy Orders who fall into these sins, Saint Basil the Great writes: “The cleric or monk who molests youths or boys or is caught kissing or committing some turpitude, let him be whipped in public, deprived of his tonsure, and () reduced to eating rye bread once a day in the evening three times per week. After six months living in a separate cell under the custody of a wise elder with great spiritual experience, let him be subjected to prayers, vigils and manual work, always under the guard of two spiritual brothers, without being allowed to have any relationship . . . with young people.” (St. Basil the Great, in St. Peter Damien, Liber Gomorrhianus) We find similar comments in St. Clement of Rome, in St. Aristides, in the Epistle of St. Barnabas, in Blessed Augustine and in Tertullian. The early Canons of the Orthodox Church also speak to these practices: From the 92 Canons of St. Basil (affirmed specifically by the 4th, 6th, and 7th Ecumenical Councils): Canon 7: “Sodomists and bestialists and murderers and sorcerers and adulterers and idolaters deserve the same condemnation, so that whatever rule you have as regarding the others observe it also in regard to these persons.” Canon 62: “As for any man who uncovers his nakedness in the midst of males, he shall be allotted the time [i.e., 15 years] fixed for those transgressing in the act of adultery.” From the 35 Canons of St. John the Faster: Canon 9: “As for sexual intercourse of men with one another, such as practicing double masturbation, it received the stated penance of up to eighty days [together with strict fasting and one hundred prostrations a day].” It should be noted that the canon for double masturbation is precisely twice the penance prescribed for solo masturbation in the preceding Canon 8 because, as St. Nicodemos of the Holy Mountain notes: “each of these offenders is not only hurting himself, but is also hurting his brother, and this makes the sin a double sin” (The Rudder, p. 938). Canon 18: “It has seemed advisable to exclude any man who has been so mad as to copulate with another man from Communion for three years, weeping and fasting, and towards evening confined to xerophagy (i.e., a strict vegan raw diet), and doing two hundred prostrations. But as for one who prefers to take it easy, let him fulfill the fifteen years [i.e., of Canon 62 of St. Basil].”

One reason why I'm no longer Mormon. I'm preparing to become Eastern Orthodox. I and my family got tied of the acquiescence to the rainbow mafia (openly queer missionaries who date the same-sex no repentance necessary). And it's also why Western Protestantism is dead and cannot hold. It has nothing to hold it together. Anyone can take any number of scriptures and interpret them 6 ways to Sunday. I'd rather have a religion that isn't swayed by the hot new thing of the day and has staying power across thousands of years. Actually you are. You believe the state should teach your religion. That's cool, I don't blame you. Separation of church and state is false; you will never have separation of church and state. Somebodies religion is going to be taught in public schools. I'd rather it be mine than yours. However, time will tell. I have 2000 years of ancient faith to back me up and and over 5000 years of basic morality. You have 10 years. You've picked an awfully shallow theological ledge to stake your life on.

And more to the point. Christianity arose in a Roman culture where homosexuality was acceptable and yet early Christians absolutely abhorred any form of homosexual practices. That is absolutely a fact. It is evident from the earliest Christian contemporary records that homosexuality was unacceptable to a Christian lifestyle so those who try to bring homosexuality into Christianity have to somehow explain and undo 2000 years of Christian teachings. Good luck with that!