Anyone else catch that Josh Weed is getting divorced?

[Traveler]

On ‎3‎/‎2‎/‎2018 at 10:00 AM, Vort said:

True enough. But as President Monson quoted, men aren't leopards. They change every day.

 

I felt to add some of my own understanding here.  First off, because of my scientific background, I believe in evolution (or as some would say - change).  Not only do I believe in evolution, I believe that evolution is a divine principle and perhaps the most active element employed by G-d in his “Plan of Salvation”; that was laid before the foundations of this world were made.

I also believe that the strongest force behind evolution is the power of intelligence.  As a consulting engineer specializing in (among other things) artificial intelligence – l am well aware that intelligence is the ability to learn and modify one’s behavior.  For example, I believe that regardless of one’s desire or proclivity towards any element of behavior that with the sure power of intelligence an individual can override any desire or proclivity to do any cognitive (conscious) behavior and instead do something they choose by the power of their intellect and will.

I want to express an additional believe I have; that some do not agree.  I believe that intelligence and will are an innate trait of an individual that they alone exercise.  Where there may be some disagreement is in what we LDS call “Agency”.  Agency may seem similar but I see it as very different – agency is something outside of an individual and is given to us all as a gift from G-d.  But the exercise of our agency is completely a factor of our intelligence and will.  I will put it this way – a choice is given to us as part of our circumstance of our existence – the choice and circumstance define our agency.  But what is chosen is not a factor of our agency.  Rather it is a factor of our intelligence and will.  What this all means is that no one can dictate anyone else’s intelligence and will.   Despite what we think, understand and choose for ourselves and what we learn – we cannot extend it to anyone else determined not to use their intelligence and will as we have.  We cannot let someone see or understand anything they do not will or allow their intelligence to embrace.

 

The Traveler

Edited March 7, 2018 by Traveler

[prisonchaplain]

On ‎3‎/‎4‎/‎2018 at 8:46 AM, DoctorLemon said:

The problem I have with sexless marriages is that at some point it is not really about the sex anymore.  It is about the fact that the wife  (or husband) is so thoughtless, so selfish as not to even be willing to spend twenty minutes once every two weeks doing something that is important for her husband.  I have difficulty understanding the psychology of these women (or men too sometimes).  It becomes almost more about unrighteous dominion than about the sex at some point.  That is the element that would kill me.

I wonder how often sexless marriages begin with one of the partners being somewhat less interested in physical intimacy, and the other being too polite, too understanding, and too self-denying. The pattern gets established, and neither realizes the importance of what's missing until a root of bitterness sets in. It's not that the blame is 50/50, but how much can one complain about the lack of physical intimacy if there is not enough emotional/psychological intimacy between the two, such that the hurt and longing gets expressed relatively early on?

[prisonchaplain]

On ‎3‎/‎5‎/‎2018 at 1:26 PM, paracaidista508 said:

Any woman who marries a dude who says he is gay deserves a divorce. That is flat out stupid. Both need a shrink.

The statement seems self-evident, yet, denies one very real option for people of faith who suffer from unwanted same-sex attraction. Very few who are attracted to the same sex are 100% that way. Men tend to be much higher on the spectrum. I heard a tremendous testimony out of Bellevue, Washington. The man was a Christian, but had same-sex attraction. Through Christian counseling and scripture study he was attempting to live a celibate life. Into his church comes a woman suffering from nymphomania. She is pregnant, and has had too many partners to even begin to try to determine who the father is. She determines to carry the baby to term, and this same-sex attracted man starts helping her through the process. Over time they become dear friends. One day they approach the pastor (Presbyterian Church USA--the denomination accepts gay marriage, but this church and pastor have elected not to), and say they want to have counseling, and would like to marry. The pastor says to the woman, "You understand that he is attracted to men, much more than to woman?" Her answer?  "Yes, that's why it has to be him. Don't you see? Men have always wanted me for what I can give them physically. With him, I KNOW he loves me for me." The pastor looks at the man and asks if he can be satisfied, married to a woman. He says, "I may love chocolate ice cream, but the doctor says chocolate is bad for me. I don't care for vanilla nearly as much, but it's not bad."

The pastor reports that gay activists often dismiss his story, saying that the couple are denying their true selves. His response? "Tell them that! I see two people who have found love that is much more spiritual and emotional than physical--yet which does give them whole satisfaction."

Not every same-sex attracted individual can be find fulfillment in heterosexual marriage. Perhaps most cannot. HOWEVER, I'd be loathe to say that those who do so, carefully, in conjunction with extensive counseling and support, and with full disclosure, deserve anything but God-blessed matrimony.

[Grunt]

4 hours ago, anatess2 said:

There are so many unforeseen things that can happen in a marriage that forces celibacy - getting deployed, a lucrative job offer far away from home, having to leave the family to care for an ailing elderly, and there's the thing I do - traveling to the homeland for months at a time.  I never had to worry about my husband when I'm away.  Physical intimacy is important to him but our eternal marriage is a whole lot more important.

Even before I believed in eternal marriage, my word, honor, integrity, and love for my wife meant more to me than finding someone to have sex with.

[paracaidista508]

7 hours ago, prisonchaplain said:

The statement seems self-evident, yet, denies one very real option for people of faith who suffer from unwanted same-sex attraction. Very few who are attracted to the same sex are 100% that way. Men tend to be much higher on the spectrum. I heard a tremendous testimony out of Bellevue, Washington. The man was a Christian, but had same-sex attraction. Through Christian counseling and scripture study he was attempting to live a celibate life. Into his church comes a woman suffering from nymphomania. She is pregnant, and has had too many partners to even begin to try to determine who the father is. She determines to carry the baby to term, and this same-sex attracted man starts helping her through the process. Over time they become dear friends. One day they approach the pastor (Presbyterian Church USA--the denomination accepts gay marriage, but this church and pastor have elected not to), and say they want to have counseling, and would like to marry. The pastor says to the woman, "You understand that he is attracted to men, much more than to woman?" Her answer?  "Yes, that's why it has to be him. Don't you see? Men have always wanted me for what I can give them physically. With him, I KNOW he loves me for me." The pastor looks at the man and asks if he can be satisfied, married to a woman. He says, "I may love chocolate ice cream, but the doctor says chocolate is bad for me. I don't care for vanilla nearly as much, but it's not bad."

The pastor reports that gay activists often dismiss his story, saying that the couple are denying their true selves. His response? "Tell them that! I see two people who have found love that is much more spiritual and emotional than physical--yet which does give them whole satisfaction."

Not every same-sex attracted individual can be find fulfillment in heterosexual marriage. Perhaps most cannot. HOWEVER, I'd be loathe to say that those who do so, carefully, in conjunction with extensive counseling and support, and with full disclosure, deserve anything but God-blessed matrimony.

Ok got it...still any woman who marries a guy who says he would rather have sex with other guys is just asking for it. To each his own, but if i was dating someone and they drop that on me I'd dump them at the curb much less marry them. I'll take the hit in the after life for being a jerk.

This is no different than people who marry others with known mental problems and then complain about the craziness that goes with if down the road. Well duh, you knew they were nuts and you still married them....enjoy.  I know a few couples like that and unless they are faking it, they are clearly not happy people. Esp the one who isn't a mental case. 

Anyway...people get what they ask for generally. The weed wife included.

[MrShorty]

I don't want to sidetrack this too much farther from Josh and Lolly and what we might learn from their experience. I also am going to have to be careful not to run to far afoul of mormonhub's rules. (If I go too far, moderators, please help me get the idea across).

On 3/7/2018 at 8:42 AM, Anddenex said:

At some point, there are men who become impotent (some earlier than others) -- should then the wife remove herself (divorce) from a husband who becomes impotent...

On 3/7/2018 at 8:42 AM, Anddenex said:

In California there was/is (don't know if he is still alive) a patriarch who was paralyzed from the neck down. His accident occurred at about the age I am. If one is paralyzed from the neck down guess what doesn't work anymore? [continues]

On 3/7/2018 at 9:03 AM, anatess2 said:

There are so many unforeseen things that can happen in a marriage that forces celibacy - getting deployed, a lucrative job offer far away from home, having to leave the family to care for an ailing elderly, and there's the thing I do - traveling to the homeland for months at a time.

The problem I have with the whole "illness/injury/etc." preventing sex idea is that it so often comes across as "finally, I/we have a 'legitimate excuse' (TM) to discard the sexual relationship." Sure these are examples of difficulties -- and maybe some couples will decide that these mark the end of the sexual relatiionship. But there are also plenty of examples of couples who get "creative" (if you will) and learn how to continue/rebuild a sexual relationship in spite of illness and injury.

I think, like DoctorLemmon mentions, that it is about selfishness/selflessness in deciding -- and maybe, in some ways it shows how even heterosexual relationship are a "complex reality". A man with ED can decide to selfishly retreat into himself and refuse all attempts to learn new ways of sexual expression, or he can look beyond what doesn't work and see how he can use what he has to nurture a sexual relationship with his wife, for example.

I'm sure that some couples decide that their illness and injury prevents them from having any kind of sexual relationship, and I can't fault the decision (as long as it was truly a mutual decision). But I also know that some couples overcome these unforeseen circumstances and still have satisfying sexual relationships.

Edited March 9, 2018 by MrShorty

[Rob Osborn]

20 hours ago, MrShorty said:

I don't want to sidetrack this too much farther from Josh and Lolly and what we might learn from their experience. I also am going to have to be careful not to run to far afoul of mormonhub's rules. (If I go too far, moderators, please help me get the idea across).

The problem I have with the whole "illness/injury/etc." preventing sex idea is that it so often comes across as "finally, I/we have a 'legitimate excuse' (TM) to discard the sexual relationship." Sure these are examples of difficulties -- and maybe some couples will decide that these mark the end of the sexual relatiionship. But there are also plenty of examples of couples who get "creative" (if you will) and learn how to continue/rebuild a sexual relationship in spite of illness and injury.

I think, like DoctorLemmon mentions, that it is about selfishness/selflessness in deciding -- and maybe, in some ways it shows how even heterosexual relationship are a "complex reality". A man with ED can decide to selfishly retreat into himself and refuse all attempts to learn new ways of sexual expression, or he can look beyond what doesn't work and see how he can use what he has to nurture a sexual relationship with his, for example.

I'm sure that some couples decide that their illness and injury prevents them from having any kind of sexual relationship, and I can't fault the decision (as long as it was truly a mutual decision). But I also know that some couples overcome these unforeseen circumstances and still have satisfying sexual relationships.

The bottom line is that marriage is a relationship of great and deep intimacy however it is manifest.