Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'men'.
Found 4 results
LatterDSaint posted a topic in General DiscussionI have had this conversation with my friend before where he brought up kissing sessions with someone you are interested in dating. This is the second time we have had a long drawn out conversation about it. Unfortunately I fell for his bait when he bought it up the second time and we had another discussion about it. He referenced the strength of youth with regards to passionate kissing and how because kissing can bring up feelings of sexual feelings, I should avoid it like he does. I explained that although it upsets/bothers him we just have different standards to him regarding this and that as long as the girl I am seeing 1. wants to do it 2. we respect each others boundaries 3. doesnt escalate past making out, then I have no problem with kissing and making out with another person. I guess since I have only read the strength of youth handbook earlier this year through him, I should understand why he is so adamant that I should accept his standard. Its true that I enjoy kissing girls but I guess more importantly, it makes me feel more secure about a potentially growing relationship. Can I do without making out with a girl, of course, but I think of the 4 pillars to a Christ centered relationship and the physical is just as important as the spiritual, intellectual and emotional pillars. I didnt necessarily mind the conversation that we had. I enjoy and greatly appreciate talking about all sorts of things with him. I think what bothers me is that I was fine with us disagreeing on it but he wasnt. I think what makes me disregard most of what he says is the fact that I would only seriously consider adopting this standard if the person I am seriously interested in held that same standard, after all I am not homosexual. I think what's also a little strange is that he is interested in the type of women who are the most likely to engage in the same behaviors. This doesn't make him a hypocrite but to me it does seem somewhat dismissive of reality in a way. What are all your thoughts. Like I said, I would likely only adopt this stance if the person im seriously interested in holds the same standard, so im unlikely to be convinced by anyone in the comments. But the discussion is open :)
loveandlight posted a topic in Support in Hard TimesHi there. I'm wanting to try to connect my husband with some lds guys who have been excommunicated for adultery so they can support each other through the repentance process. I'd love to find some who have already been fully restored, as well as others who are still working through the process. I'd also like to connect the wives in a separate group if they are sticking by their husbands to be able to support each other. I don't want to use Facebook because it's not private enough. Would this be a place where we could create some kind of support group like this? Or does anyone have any other ideas? Would you or anyone you know be interested in joining?
Guest posted a topic in LDS Gospel DiscussionHow come there aren't as many women Sunday school presidents or councillors etc, likewise men on primary presidencies ? What about 'non practicing' Temple recommend holding gay men teaching, or being on a primary presidency or auxiliaries ? Or non practicing gay women in auxiliary presidencies ? Mixed presidencies in non priesthood callings . Also on another subject why do sisters still have to 'vail their faces' in a certain part of an ordinance in the Temple ?
In Handbook 2: Administering the Church section 11.8.1 Men Serving in Primary it states: "When men are assigned to teach children, at least two responsible adults should be present at all times. The two adults could be two men, a husband and wife, or two members of the same family. In small branches, if it is not practical to have two teachers in a classroom, a member of the Primary presidency frequently visits and monitors each class that a man teaches alone." This change was made a few years ago, and I understand the concerns related to it, but something I did not like was singling out men rather than focusing on two-deep leadership for all teaching situations. It makes me feel as if I'm considered a suspected pedophile just because I'm a man. Having been raised in a large family, and having raised four daughters and two sons of my own, and having worked in Scouting for 25 years I fully support the two-deep leadership principles of the Scouting Program. But they apply equally to men and women. Would you support changing this policy title to Adults Serving in Primary and having the text changed to: "At least two responsible adults should be present at all times when teaching Primary. The two adults can be two men, or two women, a husband and wife, or two members of the same family. In small branches, if it is not practical to have two teachers in a classroom, a member of the Primary presidency frequently visits and monitors each class that is taught alone."?