[Cnsl1]

“There is no end to race” ??

How did I miss that line all these years?

[Cnsl1]

dande48 wrote:

There are a lot of things in life like that. I’ve been amazed at how wrong I’ve been in so many areas in the past, that I can’t help but wonder how many things I’m wrong about now. But I think with the Church, if you take out all the claims to truth, you’re left with something beautiful and good all the same.

Secondhand Lions wrote:

“Sometimes the things that may or may not be true are the things a man needs to believe in the most. That people are basically good; that honor, courage, and virtue mean everything; that power and money, money and power mean nothing; that good always triumphs over evil; and I want you to remember this, that love… true love never dies. You remember that, boy. You remember that. Doesn’t matter if it’s true or not. You see, a man should believe in those things, because those are the things worth believing in.”

The Church gives us comfort in this crazy world and hope that things will (in the next life) get better. It gives us motivation to be kinder. It helps us to find meaning and be happy. All the rest is just commentary.

I’d suggest not worrying so much about whether or not the Church is true. I am annoyed just as much as anyone that it’s “truthfulness” is 90% of what is talked about. But what really counts is how good and useful it is for you.

Thanks for that. It is posts like this that help me remember why I stay LDS.

I actually used that second hand lions quote in a sacrament meeting talk.

[Cnsl1]

The tithing for a year thing is not in the handbook. There is no stipulation, just the question. I know of stakes and bishops who arbitrarily decide you need to pay so long before getting recommend (though I’ve never heard of any more than 6 months), but if people have been assuming you’re fully active and engaged, I’d suspect they’d take your word for it and not ask further. It’s your interpretation that matters. If you pay online directly to SLC, local leaders won’t know anyway.

This is a conundrum, but I’d suggest family is more important, so base your decision on that guiding idea, perhaps. If you don’t believe it, to pretend you do to support your son and not freak him out at this point in his life is at most disingenuous, and assuming you’d eventually tell him, is also probably something he’d completely understand. To not support him and not tell him why would probably cause him a lot of worry. To not support and tell him would also probably cause worry, but would certainly lead to some great discussion. If he knows you have doubts, he’d probably wanna hear them. Assuming you’d eventually tell him, … again he’d probably understand.

If you’re not sure what you believe, probably take the safe route.

[Cnsl1]

Roadrunner wrote:

Interesting article excerpt from the Apr 2 Wall Street Journal:

Psychiatrists and therapists don’t often ask this question. But a growing body of research over the past decade shows that a healthy diet—high in fruits, vegetables, whole grains, fish and unprocessed lean red meat—can prevent depression. And an unhealthy diet—high in processed and refined foods—increases the risk for the disease in everyone, including children and teens.

Now recent studies show that a healthy diet may not only prevent depression, but could effectively treat it once it’s started.

Oh, there are many in the mental health field well aware that diet and exercise are extremely important factors. Exercise and good food are, in fact, medicine in that they change our neurochemistry in a very real sense, similar to medicine. Sometimes a change of diet and addition of exercise is all that is needed to relieve some mental health conditions. Not always, obviously.

There are good, peer-reviewed empirical studies showing the biochemical benefits of exercise and nutrition. I’m not talking about psuedo-science claims or the MLM vitamins your aunt swears cured her cancer.

I believe that if God cares about our health, he will inspire researchers to seek answers to many questions about what helps us to walk and not be so darned weary. Unfortunately, there’s a lot of different opinions and modern prophets have been pretty mute about it–just letting that old WofW health code from over 100 years ago ride, even though there isn’t a Mormon I’ve ever met who follows it as written. So, we’re forced (or blessed, depending on how you look at it) to study it out in our own, look for the most reliable sources of data, and see what works for us.

What works for me is a high protein, low carb diet. Green tea. Some black tea on occasion. Fruits, nuts, veggies, lots of spinach. Occasional alcohol. No coffee, not because I think it’s necessarily bad, but because I never developed a taste for it. I think it’s awful. No sodas, even though I kinda like the taste of some of them. When I limited carbs, especially bread, what little fat I had (mostly in belly area) shrunk pretty quickly. I also found I started having some aversion to bread. I just couldn’t stand the texture and feel of chewed bread in my mouth, nor the thought of swallowing that into my body. Now, I’ve since become a little more tolerant of bread, and started eating more carbs when I increased my exercise. I was just much hungrier and couldn’t always easily find the better foods. Bread is so easy and cheap. Consequently, some belly fat has returned, dang it. I try to currently keep my carbs, or most of them, at breakfast. I find I feel a little better with some complex carbs early to help give me energy. I think I’d probably do better going back to fewer carbs, but it’s more difficult, not to mention more expensive, to find the right foods.

So, my interpretation of the very old and badly in need of updating WofW is that diet is very important to our physical and mental health, and a big factor in our ability to be good disciples and parents and friends. So follow the data and figure out what works.

[Cnsl1]

Do you think the point of missionarying is more about converting the missionary rather than converting the world? Spend two years selling a product certainly helps cement your belief in the product. But I digress…

Great points above. It’s certainly a problem with the system, and probably at least a little related to this being such a very large church. Obviously no scripture or church doctrine teaches us that this behavior is okay. Well… Okay… Obviously nothing in the gospels teach us that this behavior is okay. Too bad we didn’t see this coming. I mean, we did put all those windows in the classrooms at church and made sure not to have a male teacher alone with the primary kids. I guess we don’t trust the primary teachers (just the male primary teachers… women would never do anything inappropriate with a student.. 🙄). A male leader one on one with a minor is totally fine, because how else could they ask all the questions about sex?

I get it that there is agency. Leader A might feel inspired to call Brother X but Bro X can still decide to get “frisky” , which shouldn’t be a condemnation if Leader A. We can’t expect leaders to be omniscient. God supposedly is and He still lets agency run its course, and doesn’t seem to protect these victims. We can, however, expect leaders to be forward thinking, to pay attention to red flags, and to work together to change a flawed system that supports and protects potential abusers within the system. Trouble is, most of the leaders are working within the paradigm that good men won’t do bad things, that God is directly involved and will alert them if something is awry, and that Bishops and presidents and leaders possess some special ability to counsel anyone within their stewardship–that they are in fact God’s vessel to minister to that part of the flock.

[Cnsl1]

I’m still having trouble with this one, and have gone back and forth as to what Bishop may or may not have done, and to what degree he was manipulated in that ersatz interview. It seems clear he’s not innocent, but exactly how awful might be debatable. In this day and age, we’re very quick to jump on the bandwagon and grab our pitch forks to slay the abuser, but let’s remember we’re still in the land that demands guilt be proven. It’s tough that even completely innocent folks can have their lives changed by an untrue accusation. Many of us so badly want to see the church take one in the face, and so many of us want every abuser to suffer for the pain we’ve felt or seen in our loved ones that we become like those we complain about on here… Categorical, closed to alternative explanations, and full of confirmation bias.

I’d encourage everyone to hold off judgment, and if you care enough to have an opinion, try to disprove your initial thought on the matter. Seem evidence that disconfirms your belief.

Then if he still floats, string him up!!

[Cnsl1]

I’ve had a little experience in disciplinary councils, and it was probably my least enjoyable part of the calling.

I agree that the example Dandee related seems expressly against what’s in the handbook, or what was in three of the handbook 1’s that I’ve had (based on my memory, at least). The bishop and SP requirement for the guy sounds like something from the OT and D&C, but not the handbook. They’re basically taking away his agency, and holding his membership hostage until he marries the woman they want him to marry, rather than let him marry who he wants. By their logic (presuming this is all true), they better start making disciplinary appointments for all those who divorced anyone who wasn’t disfellowshipped or ex’d, then married someone else, cuz man, once you’ve made those commitments, you can’t change your mind! Something sounds fishy…

I have a somewhat similar story, however. I watched an apparent vengeful ex keep her ex from getting sealed to his new wife, or even getting a temple recommend, because she insisted he wasn’t current on alimony even though he insisted he was. She called his Bishop frequently to make sure he knew. So the bishop felt he had no choice but to deny the man a temple recommend, even though he was reportedly worthy in all other areas. The man eventually got tired of trying to prove his financial obligations were met, and tired of fighting it, and eventually went inactive.

[Cnsl1]

A very thoughtful post. I tried to form a cogent opinion in response, but I think since I stopped believing in the BofM as historical, I stopped being able to dissect it in that depth. I take things more as general principles. I know I still can consider the peoples as real, and study the work like one might study Moby Dick, or the Scarlet Letter, trying to decipher motives, internal struggles, and deep meaning, but… I’m not back there yet.

[Cnsl1]

As a footnote, I have had some interesting experiences accepting and turning down callings.

I’m a little musical and play a few different instruments. Many years ago, I was called by a member of the bishopric to be the priesthood pianist. I told him I don’t play the piano. He seemed a little annoyed or perplexed or something, and almost argued with me. He said they really needed to fill that calling and said they felt good about me in that position. I told him that still doesn’t mean I could play the piano. I told him I could play the guitar and would be more than happy to play the guitar for priesthood, but he declined.

I sometimes wondered if that was my chance to learn another instrument. Maybe God was giving me another chance to be a piano player and I declined. I don’t think that anymore. I just think the bishopric was being presumptuous. Besides, God knows that I would have turned all the hymns into bluesy arrangements and wouldn’t have lasted a month anyway.

[Cnsl1]

These are some thoughts I have about callings and being relieved of them:

First, remember the services are volunteer and we can quit whenever we want. You do not have to give a reason. You don’t have to ASK to be released. Like with any volunteer service, it’s nice for the organization if you give them time to find a replacement before quitting. So rather than saying, “please release me” instead say, “I can no longer do this calling and my last day will be ____.”

You don’t have to give a reason, but since leaders are apt to ask, consider providing a reason when you give your notice. One of the best reasons I’ve heard is “I’ve prayed and pondered a lot on this and feel that I just really need to be fed right now and I can no longer serve in this calling with the dedication it needs to have.”

If you ask, you’re inviting the leader to talk you out of it. If the decision has been made (by you, through personal revelation), you simply give the leader time to find a replacement and they cannot argue. They can grumble behind your back, they can be annoyed, but they can’t fight you and they know they can’t make you stay. You relieve the pressure on yourself and put it on the leaders.

That being said, I also believe that in this mostly volunteer church, it makes sense that we all take our turns being leaders and doing the difficult jobs. Some jobs are just not suited for us. Some jobs are really difficult if not impossible due to a variety of reasons such as faith transition, family situations, work situations, or emotional issues, to name a few. But, if we want to serve and contribute, there are usually things we can help with.

I used to think that just about everyone would accept any calling that came from the bishopric, but when I took my turn being a guy calling on those people, I found this wasn’t always the case. And when it wasn’t, these people had very good reasons for declining. I once suggested having everyone in the ward fill out a list of callings they would like. My thought was if you could get as many people serving in areas they enjoyed, you’d have happier people better able to do those callings well. Some people LOVE being nursery leaders. Others don’t like it. When you have a nursery leader who loves the calling, your nursery rocks. Same goes for scouting, YM, YW, WML, etc.

[Cnsl1]

I think you’ve received some good responses. You seem like a wonderful parent and i suspect your daughter is doing so well because of the things you’re doing.

I’m a mental health professional. I feel your description of your daughter’s behaviors sound more like high functioning ASD than ADHD-inattentive type. Obviously, dx require many other pieces of data, but it sounds like there are at least enough indicators to warrant requesting an assessment from your school. They may balk because your daughter isn’t misbehaving and is probably getting good grades. Nevertheless, she might greatly benefit from pragmatic language therapy and social skill training, as well as possible functional adaptive skill training. The school psychologist and speech language pathologist at your school should be able to adequately assess her eligibility for these services, which as someone mentioned, are free in public schools. They may not need to assess much more as it sounds like you’ve already had someone evaluate her.

I can give you more information and help through private message if you’re interested.

(I’ll try to remember to check here more often).

Good luck.

[Cnsl1]

SilentDawning wrote:

Quote:

How would it affect society at large?

I think you would see more sexually motivated crimes, and fewer restraints on people who have tendencies toward porn.

Your suspicion follows the popular opinion, but not the data. The evidence suggests otherwise, which is something I discovered a while back when researching a talk on the subject. Consider this: https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/all-about-sex/201601/evidence-mounts-more-porn-less-sexual-assault

[Cnsl1]

That’s a good story. I might can top it because I once got to play a jazzy/rock Christmas set while actually setup in the chapel (LDS).

The situation was thus: little combo group asked to play at a ward party. Cultural Hall was jam packed full of tables and decorations. Bishop suggested opening the folding doors and setting up the band inside the chapel. Drum kit, piano, sax, electric bass, guitar along the back row and between the pews.

I’ve played music in several LDS cultural halls, and even in a Buddhist temple but never before or since in an LDS chapel.

[Cnsl1]

Our stake girls camp also said no yoga pants, no shorts, no capris. No bare shoulders either. Tighter dress rules at a girls camp than at a coed conservative high school… Or BYU for that matter.

[Cnsl1]

I’m not advocating the frivolous flinging of four letter words, but a well placed “€π¢&” sometimes communicates very well.

Also, swearing might just make us stronger. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/05/170505085015.htm

[Author]

Posts