pushka
-
Posts
2792 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by pushka
-
-
Originally posted by Cal+Jan 30 2005, 12:47 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Cal @ Jan 30 2005, 12:47 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--pushka@Jan 30 2005, 12:17 PM
all this talk of California 10 etc. is so alien to me, and ridiculous! Maybe it's because I'm an Englander!!! lol.
Perhaps its the words themselves you are reacting to and not the actual concepts. So tell me what it is like in England that makes things so different there.
Well, as you can tell by my addition of LOL and
the Englander bit wasn't supposed to be taken seriously...I still maintain that the idea of reducing people to numbers seems somewhat distasteful to me, sort of like going into a department store and choosing your ideal partner by the size/state written on the coathanger!!! I'm sure there are men/women all over the place who do treat their prospective partners this way, I would have hoped that it is not the norm, but as long as it isn't happening to me in my relationships then I shouldn't worry if that's what other people are choosing to do...and they will bear the consequences of the choices they make.
Perhaps I've been 'off the scene' for too long to know what the selection methods are these days...I tend to spend my time mingling among socialists and anarchists, and trying to change the world to take any notice of how big a man's wallet is, or how finely turned out and pretty a woman is....like I said...it's all ALIEN to me, more like the toffs down in London
-
Thanks for coming back on the things I said Cal...Sorry I didn't take 'kick her to the curb' literally!! I understood what you meant, it sounded awful tho, not the sort of wording I would have used, but I didn't take it as meaning abuse.
When I referred to discussing any sexual problems before any commitment being made, I was specifically speaking about any woman, or man even, that had suffered some sort of childhood sexual abuse which might have left them with a problem about having any kind of sexual relations...I was not referring to normal couples because, like you said, if you haven't had sex then you have no idea what you are going to feel about it until you do.
I am sorry that there are so many shallow people in the world, marrying for looks or money alone, and all this talk of California 10 etc. is so alien to me, and ridiculous! Maybe it's because I'm an Englander!!! lol.
-
I think PD has a good point...and I think that the Church should recognise it's mistakes of the past, and repent of them now instead of at the last days.
-
As far as I can remember, 'original sin' was the sin of Adam and Eve when Eve had her dealings with the snake in the garden of Eden...are you talking of another disobedience that was committed?Originally posted by Fatboy@Jan 28 2005, 10:07 PM
Sin denotes imperfection. Mortality is imperfection. There does that make more sense? I don't know how else to explain it. No such thing as original sin. Sin was brought in to the world by disobedience by Adam.
-
DisRuptive, I can see where you are coming from here. When I divorced I did not expect to receive any payments for myself from my ex husband...it was mentioned by the solicitor that I could, but as far as I was concerned the only requirements were that we split equally the 'spoils' of the marriage, furniture, etc. and that he pay his maintenance money for the 2 children...in fact he never had to do that either because under our law if the children stay overnight with him 3 times a week this cancels out the requirement to pay maintenance...so I didn't come away with a windfall from my marriage...I do feel that once the man and woman have parted ways and all the commitments regarding the children have been sorted, what they then earn/don't earn is to do with as they will...the are completely independent from each other.
-
Perhaps it would be better to just accept the 'original sin' theory and stop all the arguing!!!
-
I'm sorry to have been so vague Cal...I suppose I was referring to the old 'this is my testimony..' saying...I have read your answer in another post where you say that you choose to believe some things and not others? hope that is what you meant! I was just thinking that your whole belief in the LDS church being the 'true' church might be a little shaken by your doubts over events/reforms etc.
-
Originally posted by Amillia+Jan 27 2005, 08:52 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Amillia @ Jan 27 2005, 08:52 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin--pushka@Jan 27 2005, 09:26 AM
Hmm...I wouldn't mind exploring the issues you had with that site in more depth, since I found it an interesting site and tended to side with their opinions...perhaps you would like to explore the site in general with me and talk about it privately? Tell me of the things you thought were over the top and the errors you believe you found which they 'danced' around?
It has been over a year ago, so I would have to start over, because all I have left in my memory is my impressions and distaste for the fashion in which they handled any rebuttles. I will say this, they do have a spirit of convincing. There works are based upon actual happenings and journals of disgruntled saints, but their understanding is darkened and their agenda is totally about destroying the faith the members have.
Now if it were all about truth and light and discovery of a higher way, I could see their dedication at tearing down the church through the mistakes of those who went before us. But it doesn't give a higher way, it is only about digging up the dirt on a specific organization.
When in history have there not been errors made by great men and women? And when did we throw away the constitution or our country's freedoms because of the mistakes made by them.
In the world we tend to over look the bad that good men did, and enjoy the good that came from their beneficial works. When you read the site by the Tanners, all you get is a wallowing in the dirt and this is supposed to invalidate all the good.
These weaknesses of men are ever present. The apostles of Christ showed these weaknesses continually.
Okay, I will stop with the defence and just state that after all the dust is settled, the thing which is most important to have and hold sacred and dear is the Spirit of Christ.
The teachings held within the BofM on this point alone is priceless. The BofM is the most complete instruction manual, and correct manual for telling us how to come to Christ, surrender to Him and reap the most precious gift given to man on earth; the pure love of Christ, charity.
Charity is the power to endure (Moroni 7:47-48) and what is more necessary in today's world than the power to endure? Charity is more than this, as taught by the BofM, it is the power of the atonement, the power to become like Christ and it is only gained through praying to be filled with it after you have fully become submissive as a child, as taught in Mosiah.
You won't find the total and complete instructions for this process anywhere else in the religious world.
Joseph Smith the man and prophet was the instrument through which God gave us this marvelous work and wonder. But some can only see the weaknesses and throw away everything good and great.
I have done many things that are good. But quite often I am totally rejected because I was arrested once for disorderly conduct. The public record on this matter is totally wrong. The man who arrested me and wrote the false report, only did so to cover up his own wrong doing.
Will future generation come upon these documents and invalidate all the good I did because of it?
I see many of the things the Tanners have done as doing just that to JS and the church.
Thanks Amillia...
I appreciate your point of view regarding the Tanners' site. I note that they are Christian, ex-mormons...perhaps they are 'tearing down' the LDS church because they feel that it let them down and they wish to enlighten others, or support others who feel the same way as they do...and wish them to explore other spiritual doctrines.
-
Jenda...I notice that this is your only contribution to this thread...what would you suggest as being a good way to help Mark44 with his problems over being gay? Whether you believe that he is gay because of biology or because of satan or 'problems bonding with his parents'? Do you think he should rely on prayer or exorcism only or should seek some sort of medical help too?
-
Originally posted by Cal+Jan 27 2005, 04:20 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Cal @ Jan 27 2005, 04:20 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Originally posted by -huma17@Jan 27 2005, 04:09 PM
<!--QuoteBegin--pushka@Jan 25 2005, 08:47 PM
I just feel a little suspicious of changes being constantly made to the BoM, it sort of makes it less likely to be an inspired book if it constantly needed altering.
How did it 'constantly' needed to be altered? The original printings where full of printing errors and mistakes, which needed to be changed. After that, there were no 'alterations' to the BoM.
Oh really--just recently the church changed the wording of a scripture dealing with a controversial section that refered to the Lamanites saying the would become "white" and delightsome (I think it said)..... the church changed the word to "pure".... for the obvious reason to deflect the accusations that the church considered the lamanites somehow inferior if they weren't white. Look it up for yourself---you can find lots of references to it on the internetm and then read it for yourself.
There are plenty of sites that are more than happy to point out the other changes.
Cal...thank you for addressing this question back to Huma17...I must admit, having not read the BofM for a while, nor visited those sites you refer to for a while either, I was relying on my memory regarding changes that had been made...thank you for acknowledging them. Huma17 I am sorry that I cannot argue whether there are further alterations which change the doctrine or not, so I shall keep away from this subject until I am in a better position! :)
-
LOL...good examples...I read the last one as God is nowhere!
-
Phew! This topic is really flying now isn't it...I have been in touch with the original poster and it seems she was looking for opinions on Divorce from differing religions, perhaps not quite the answers she got here, but never mind, her talk topic has changed now...
Anyway...Thank you Strawberry for your remarks about my post...I am pleased to be reading and posting here more often again too...gives me plenty of food for thought.
Cal...I am very sorry if my comments offended you in any way...I am from the UK, so yes my experience of the USA way of life does come from the TV...I suppose if I watched enough of the old american soaps...Dynasty and Dallas for instance, I would agree with your assertions that people only marry for looks or money...
I am very sorry to hear the reason why you divorced your wife...she was indeed very shallow. The comment I glibly made 'no wonder you are divorced!', which I do realise sounds a little silly, was made assuming that you considered yourself to be a shallow person in that you only chose your wife because of her good looks...a bit of the old well you got what you deserved then...if you were not shallow, and didn't marry her just for that reason (which I assume you didn't) then of course you didn't get what you deserved, and I am sorry to have upset you. The comment was actually directed more towards disruptive and his photographs and captions!
I know that you did not mention abuse in your statements either...I was not saying that you did. The only reason I brought that up, and the wife-swapping etc. was to illustrate the reasons why my own marriage failed in spite of us having previously had a great sex life together...I felt that the things my husband started to demand were abusive.
It would be ideal for everybody approaching marriage to know that they were going to be sexually compatible...I am not against sex before marriage, however members of the LDS church are, so obviously this may be a problem that they face, and should try to overcome together. There may have been problems of sexual abuse against the wife before she met her partner which affect the way she is sexually, this ought to be discussed before they commit to each other I think though. Sometimes it is the man who has the lower sex drive...I have found this with 1 relationship at least...he was happy to just have sex every 3 months...I wasn't too happy with this but endured it and just cuddled and kissed him in the meantime...I didn't contemplate going off for one night stands, it all depends on who you are, how strong your commitment to one another is.
I just had a problem with the posts that Cal and DisRuptive made in general because they seemed to be laying all the problems within marriages at the feet of the wives rather than at the feet of both of the partners...if I have misunderstood your meanings in this respect then I apologise.
-
Gosh! disruptive and cal...you both sound soo sexist...I really can't believe the things you are posting.
As others like Curvette have stated, yes it is important for both partners to try to keep themselves healthy and in shape...this is not always possible due to illness, is that a valid reason for the husband to seek satisfaction from a love affair too?
Disruptive and Cal appear to be living in somewhere like Hollywood judging by the examples of reasons why men and women marry each other...again as other posters have stated, there will always be those shallow enough to marry just for good looks and money...celebrities most likely!! Are these the sort of people you would like to consider yourself to be? No wonder you have been divorced!
May I say that I married my partner after being with him for 6 years. I met him when I was 17 and he was 19. I knew, when I met him, that he was unemployed...we both were, yes I actively encouraged him to get a job and sought one myself, but I didn't expect him to get a 'high flying' job that could keep me and see me jetting off in some luxurious lifestyle! We were together for 17 years altogther...our sex life was very healthy until he suggested sexual practises that I found disgusting...(do you really want me to go into detail? I am not just talking different positions in bed here...lol), and he also wanted us to 'swing', wife swap or whatever term you wish to use...I was not happy to go along with this in a 'normal' marriage, and would hope that you guys on here would see that as a good enough reason to lose interest in having sex with him frequently anymore...I still did have sex with him whenever I could stomach it, but felt more and more depressed at his complete disrespect for me and our marriage vows. He didn't help out very much around the house or with our 2 young children either, he was very selfish, spending the majority of his money on 'toys' for himself rather than us pooling our resources and treating the family to days out and such. Do you think I had good enough grounds for a divorce? By the way, I later found out that he was having affairs even before we were married, it was just in his nature...and no, I'm not a glamour model or anything, but I was considered to be good looking, some of his friends even acknowledged this, but I resisted their charms! wish I hadn't done now...
I hope this sort of answers some of your questions Cal, about what it was I disagreed with in points 5 and 6 of your original post. I don't think either partner should be demanding of the other, they should talk about things they disagree upon in a reasonable manner. Neither partner should denigrate the other and yes, respect is the most important feature of a marriage....tolerance of certain imperfections too, as long as the partner being tolerated doesn't take advantage of this and take it to mean that it can excuse all sorts of bad behaviour.
-
Yes it would seem so.
-
Amilia, I think you have to accept that your nightmare was a product of the increased media coverage of all sorts of terror activity, threats and counter action by others, and try your best to live each day as it comes, to the best of your ability, without worrying excessively about what may or may not occur.
Tragically terrorist activity does occur, as in the 9/11 attack and others, but it is not wise to dwell on these events at all times as it will only make you anxious...
Live life wisely and happily.
All the best, Michele
-
Thank you writer chick...I wish you all the success in the world with whomever you choose to marry...
-
Amilia I am saddened by your insistence on only 1 explanation as to why Mark is gay and why he is so depressed over the issue...have you studied science at school/college at all? Don't you believe in genetics in any regard, even in regard to illnesses in babies? This is so narrow minded and dangerous thinking...please do not try to prevent Mark from seeking some sort of medical as well as spiritual help for his problems.
-
Hmm...I wouldn't mind exploring the issues you had with that site in more depth, since I found it an interesting site and tended to side with their opinions...perhaps you would like to explore the site in general with me and talk about it privately? Tell me of the things you thought were over the top and the errors you believe you found which they 'danced' around?
-
What about the men who lose interest in their own looks...become a fat slob? Are they forgiven for this, or should this justify their women going out elsewhere to find someone who looks better, and gives them sex on demand!!
I don't think marriages should consist of master/mistress and slave, it should be an equal opportunity deal...commitment with co-operation on both parts, and lots and lots of communication whenever one partner feels ill done to.
-
LOL Cal
Points 1-4 I completely agree with (although I didn't strictly follow those myself, and am divorced now!! lol)...points 5 and 6 I will take to be tongue in cheek remarks!!
I think the most important things to do in a marriage, to keep it strong, are to work together, play together and respect each other. When temptation comes your way in the form of another man or woman, resist! Care for each other when either of you are ill, and share the responsibility of raising and disciplining the children as far as is possible. Do not criticise or undermine your partner in front of family members or friends, hold your tongue until you can discuss your differences alone. Try to smile :)
-
Sounds like a good way to teach it in my opinion.Originally posted by TheProudDuck@Jan 26 2005, 06:30 PM
I guess I would want the origin of life taught something like this: "The best available evidence indicates that species evolve from other species by a process of natural selection of random genetic mutations. This theory is sufficient to explain the evolution of all life from a single cell. Nobody knows how that first cell came to be. The best available evidence indicates that based on the age and extent of the observable universe, it is statistically unlikely that the components of a single cell would have assembled themselves and combined as a result of random interactions of molecules. In The Origin of Species, Darwin posited that God had created the first cell. Others posit that life on earth was just amazingly lucky, like rolling double six five times in a row at the craps table. Others have speculated that this universe is one of multiple universes, whose total extent and age suffice to satisfy the extremely long odds against the random generation of a cell. However, this last theory is supported by no more evidence than the first. Students should recognize both the conclusions and the limitations of the best available evidence on this subject."
Amilia, I live in the UK and religion is loosely taught in state as well as church schools, we must have different rules over here regarding the teaching of religion in state schools.
-
Originally posted by Amillia+Jan 25 2005, 10:36 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Amillia @ Jan 25 2005, 10:36 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Originally posted by -pushka@Jan 25 2005, 08:42 PM
<!--QuoteBegin--Amillia@Jan 25 2005, 05:48 PM
There are no-so-strong mormons always, everywhere. Where can you run?
I presume you mean not-so-strong Mormons...
Well, everywhere you go..especially if you go on a Mission, you are going to find non mormons and not so strong mormons...don't you find it interesting to listen to their questions about your beliefs, and discuss/debate them in a 'friendly' manner.
I feel it is sad that non mormons cannot quote from 'anti' lds sites without being labelled 'bashers', as sometimes the words that these sites use are more eloquent than the ones I use...and they have already done the research into the questions I have asked...
What is current policy regarding posting things from anti sites, such as the articles by Sandra Tanner?
I would bet that you quote Sandra Tanner and your will be joining me in the mod-status limbo.
Oh dear Amilia...did you do that too? What did you think of their site by the way?
-
McCarthyism was touched upon in the classic Barbra Streisand and Robert Redford movie 'The Way We Were'...also about communism at the time, and a very lovely, sad love story too...I would recommend it...ladies, bring out the Kleenex!!
-
Thank you Jenda...those were very interesting and helpful replies...I look forward to seeing the new thread, and hope that others will be able to assist you in it...without resorting to all sorts of scriptual quoting from, mainly, lds works, as sometimes they get a little confusing!!! I haven't studied my bible/bom/d&c for many years!
My Testimony
in LDS Gospel Discussion
Posted
Thank you Cal...I'm sorry if I put you 'on the spot'...I think your testimony was very reasonable.
Lindy, I thought that your reply made good sense too...
Thank you both! :)