LDS Papas and Mamas #48 - Page 9

[NewCrunchyDaddy]

Originally Posted by Stacymom

In reference to our earlier conversation, I definitely feel like a mom tonight.

I just made tuna noodle casserole for my family for dinner. It was there, cheap, and more nutritious than chinese take out or delivery pizza.

I'm going to slink away now and dodge the tomatos...

Mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm Delivery Pizza... :

[Leiahs]

Originally Posted by Stacymom

In reference to our earlier conversation, I definitely feel like a mom tonight.

I just made tuna noodle casserole for my family for dinner. It was there, cheap, and more nutritious than chinese take out or delivery pizza.

I'm going to slink away now and dodge the tomatos...

All I'm thinking is that you *MUST* have a better recipe for tuna noodle casserole than I do, because the one I have, that my mom gave me, well...I don't think it comes even CLOSE to being anything nutritious. At least pizza and chinese both come with veggies!! And taste a ton better, too! (Plus I just hate eating that casserole, lol!!)

[Stacymom]

Well my ultra picky 4 year old ate two bowls of it, so it can't have been all bad. : (Fun new smilie!) Plus, our eating out budget is shot to pieces, so we make do.

And Becky, I throw peas and chopped celery in, and use whole weat noodles.

I really can cook, but tonight was just not the night.

[brightonwoman]

Originally Posted by Stacymom

In reference to our earlier conversation, I definitely feel like a mom tonight.

I just made tuna noodle casserole for my family for dinner. It was there, cheap, and more nutritious than chinese take out or delivery pizza.

I'm going to slink away now and dodge the tomatos...

hey, making something at home (even with prepared ingredients) is probably better than buyign something. Last night we had french toast for dinner!!!

[brightonwoman]

OT--kid pics

I just created a photo blog for our family...(we're sending it out with the christmas letter) just thought I'd share if anyone is interested!

jenni

[klg47]

Originally Posted by LionTigerBear

The church itself does not encourage members to vote in any way, except to follow their conscience.

This is typically true, but like several others have said, they did come out with specific recommendations on the gay marriage and protection of marriage votes. However, when they read the last one in church, I thought it was very clear that you must support the one man/one woman resolution, and my friend (who has since left the church) thought that the statement meant you could support it or not.

Originally Posted by quarteralien

When gay marriage came up in California, members were encouraged to vote against it.

I'm with Alisa - this was an official statement from the prophet.

Originally Posted by Moonprysm

I was told by my missionaries that there is a difference in when he is speaking for God and when he is speaking for himself.

As others have said, he was speaking as the Prophet when he issued the statements on protecting one man/one woman marriage.

Originally Posted by Leiahs

And also, I'm no history buff, nor a Constitution buff, but doesn't the current, unamended constitution say something about marriage being between a man and a woman?

The Constitution says nothing about marriage. The current issue is that some people are pressing for a Constitutional amendment stating that marriage is between a man and a woman.

Have all of you read the very long interview on LDS.org about same-gender attraction? It is not stated as "official doctrine", however, it is published on the Church's official website. They start discussing public policy and the Constitution about 2/3 of the way down. I will just quote one short part that says clearly that the First Presidency does support a Constitutional amendment defining marriage as between one man and one woman. I have added the bolding:

ELDER OAKS: Law has at least two roles: one is to define and regulate the limits of acceptable behavior. The other is to teach principles for individuals to make individual choices. The law declares unacceptable some things that are simply not enforceable, and there’s no prosecutor who tries to enforce them. We refer to that as the teaching function of the law. The time has come in our society when I see great wisdom and purpose in a United States Constitutional amendment declaring that marriage is between a man and a woman. There is nothing in that proposed amendment that requires a criminal prosecution or that directs the attorneys general to go out and round people up, but it declares a principle and it also creates a defensive barrier against those who would alter that traditional definition of marriage.
There are people who oppose a federal Constitutional amendment because they think that the law of family should be made by the states. I can see a legitimate argument there. I think it’s mistaken, however, because the federal government, through the decisions of life-tenured federal judges, has already taken over that area. This Constitutional amendment is a defensive measure against those who would ignore the will of the states appropriately expressed and require, as a matter of federal law, the recognition of same-gender marriages — or the invalidation of state laws that require that marriage be between a man and a woman. In summary, the First Presidency has come out for an amendment (which may or may not be adopted) in support of the teaching function of the law. Such an amendment would be a very important expression of public policy, which would feed into or should feed into the decisions of judges across the length and breadth of the land.

Here's a news article and the document filed by the Church in California.

[NewCrunchyDaddy]

Originally Posted by klg47

This is typically true, but like several others have said, they did come out with specific recommendations on the gay marriage and protection of marriage votes. However, when they read the last one in church, I thought it was very clear that you must support the one man/one woman resolution, and my friend (who has since left the church) thought that the statement meant you could support it or not.



I'm with Alisa - this was an official statement from the prophet.



As others have said, he was speaking as the Prophet when he issued the statements on protecting one man/one woman marriage.



The Constitution says nothing about marriage. The current issue is that some people are pressing for a Constitutional amendment stating that marriage is between a man and a woman.

Have all of you read the very long interview on LDS.org about same-gender attraction? It is not stated as "official doctrine", however, it is published on the Church's official website. They start discussing public policy and the Constitution about 2/3 of the way down. I will just quote one short part that says clearly that the First Presidency does support a Constitutional amendment defining marriage as between one man and one woman. I have added the bolding:



Here's a news article and the document filed by the Church in California.

It will be interesting to see how this is handled in my GLBT Lit class this coming semester.

On a personal level - I don't understand how gay marriage is detrimental to society ... but I trust President Hinckley. Nor is this the only Church policy I don't "get" or understand or agree with (like, why can't you have a beard as a veil worker?) ... but again, I trust President Hinckley, and that's enough for now.

[NewCrunchyDaddy]

On another note, I got an email today that my paper on The Shining has been one of the undergrad research projects chosen by the Utah Conference for Undergraduate Research and they asked me to present on the panel at the February Conference. :

[klg47]

I've been searching for the full text of the letter that was read in every LDS church in the USA in May 2006, but I can't find it. There are two news releases directly from the church:

Church Leaders Urge Members to Contact Representatives in Support of Marriage

Letter from First Presidency of the Church to Church leaders in the United States

This article in Meridian Magazine quotes a bit more.

After reading these articles, and going from memory (which is extremely dubious, particularly in my case), I recall that the letter started out explaining that there was an upcoming vote in the senate on the marriage amendment. It then quoted the Proclamation on the Family and stated the Church's opinion on marriage, namely that marriage between a man and a woman is the only acceptable marriage relationship. It then urged members to “express themselves on this urgent matter to their elected representatives in the Senate.”

So I guess they did not directly come out and tell people to contact their senators in support of the marriage amendment. However, they clearly laid out the Church's opinion and clearly stated their support of the amendment, and then asked the members to contact their senators to express their opinions. I took that to mean that the only proper expression was in support of the amendment. My friend felt that the letter allowed for contacting one's senators in opposition to the amendment. In my mind it is black and white, but I can see where some would see the 'gray'.

[Bekka]

Originally Posted by brightonwoman

my gosh, you could almost be my twin! almost... ok, so maybe only a teeny bit.
I was only married 4yrs ago (anniversary nxt week!). Oldest of 9, I've got a 7yo and a baby, sew, read, used to play flute. I like kids...at least, I like mine...usually... (j/k!)
DH is a teacher though--he started in english and history but he's now getting his MS in math--grant-funded program to add endorsements for rural teachers. We're delighted at his getting a degree (and higher pay) at no cost to us! Whopee!

Well, apparently you love LOTR (sig) and so do we. Also, I want to design historical costumes and fantasy gowns (drool) but I'm compromising with a dress that looks like quarteralien's dress (last thread). What else makes me weird? I like Star Trek and Ever After, and I want to learn to paint acrylics and pot and I want to be a midwife when I grow up. I want to serve a mission with dh and I speak Russian. I want to travel on the Trans Siberian Railway. (You're already in Alaska, so maybe that's enough for you! ) I lived in Germany and was an Army brat. I also like Jane Austen, but I like Tolkien way, way more.

[Bekka]

Sorry for the non sequitur! You all have been extremely busy and I'm only one day behind! I've been busy and it's so late I have to get up in 5 hours (stupid, I know). Fascinating discussion and I respect all opinions. I agree with what pretty much everyone has said (and I was glad I didn't live in CA).

Originally Posted by Bekka

Well, apparently you love LOTR (sig) and so do we. Also, I want to design historical costumes and fantasy gowns (drool) but I'm compromising with a dress that looks like quarteralien's dress (last thread). What else makes me weird? I like Star Trek and Ever After, and I want to learn to paint acrylics and pot and I want to be a midwife when I grow up. I want to serve a mission with dh and I speak Russian. I want to travel on the Trans Siberian Railway. (You're already in Alaska, so maybe that's enough for you! ) I lived in Germany and was an Army brat. I also like Jane Austen, but I like Tolkien way, way more.

[quarteralien]

Originally Posted by NewCrunchyDaddy

On a personal level - I don't understand how gay marriage is detrimental to society ... but I trust President Hinckley.

That's why I brought up what was said in "Confessions of a Medical Heretic." I had often wondered about the question "Why do people feel so threatened by gay marriage?" and I thought he had some compelling reasons. I don't know if I agree with them, but they have definitely given me a lot to think about.

Thanks all for confirming it was indeed from the first presidency to vote for Prop 22. I honestly havent' thought about it in years, and didn't trust my memory as to where it came from. But now that I have thought about it, I remember what it was like at BYU while all of that was going on. I remember all Californians being encouraged to vote by absentee ballot, which my sister and I did. I remember letters to the editor deploring the direction, comparing it to our own church's deviation from standard marriage, and aren't we hypocritical to say someone else can't have a marriage that isn't between one man and one woman when we very clearly didn't always do that. I remember one gay student (yes, they do exist at BYU) basically writing his suicide letter to the school paper, and his cousin writing in after he had died to point fingers at all homophobic members of the church who drove him to suicide. Very strange time. No wonder I hadn't thought about it lately.

[quarteralien]

Originally Posted by brightonwoman

http://brightonwoman.blogspot.com/20...n-brother.html

Oh it's just so true...

I couldn't get this link to work last night. That is great. I think I'll print it out and keep it in my diaper bag when this next baby is born.

[klg47]

Originally Posted by NewCrunchyDaddy

they asked me to present on the panel at the February Conference. :

Wow, Congratulations!!

Originally Posted by Bekka

Also, I want to design historical costumes and fantasy gowns (drool) but I'm compromising with a dress that looks like quarteralien's dress (last thread).

My sister once bought fabric and a pattern for a beautiful medieval-style dress. The fabric is blue crushed velvet and white satin. Where would I ever wear a dress like that? Yet I can't bring myself to give away the fabric and pattern! I've got to just make it as a Halloween costume or something. My current excuses are that I keep changing sizes, I need to nurse & don't know how to make it nursing accessible, etc.

We went to our city's Christmas parade, and they had a group that learns 1860's dancing and the women dress up in 1860's (Civil War era) Southern dresses! Obviously that's not an activity that I would be able to get into without my husband, and he had no interest in it whatsoever

[Leiahs]

Originally Posted by klg47

The Constitution says nothing about marriage. The current issue is that some people are pressing for a Constitutional amendment stating that marriage is between a man and a woman.

Have all of you read the very long interview on LDS.org about same-gender attraction?

Well that would explain why a Google search only retrieved info about marriage amendments, then. Thank you for the info, I stand educated! Also thank you for the link. I will read it when I get a chance

[brightonwoman]

i'm such a geek

Originally Posted by Bekka

Well, apparently you love LOTR (sig) and so do we. Also, I want to design historical costumes and fantasy gowns (drool) but I'm compromising with a dress that looks like quarteralien's dress (last thread). What else makes me weird? I like Star Trek and Ever After, and I want to learn to paint acrylics and pot and I want to be a midwife when I grow up. I want to serve a mission with dh and I speak Russian. I want to travel on the Trans Siberian Railway. (You're already in Alaska, so maybe that's enough for you! ) I lived in Germany and was an Army brat. I also like Jane Austen, but I like Tolkien way, way more.

We named Samuel/Sammy with full intent to call him Samwise... Willy got the nickname Bilbo because he happened to see a minute of Fellowship when he was about 3, and did a Bilbo imitation that was about the funniest thing you've ever seen... So, while we are enormous LOTR fans, those are actually legitimate nicknames too!
Did I mention I worked as a professional costumer all through college and a bit since? And we went to a renn faire the year we got married JUST so we could dress up for it. I went to all three LOTR movies in full costume--the latter two with elf ears.
I am intimidated by the responsibility of midwifery, but doulaism does appeal to me.
I don't like Jane Austen though, so there I guess our paths diverge. Oh well, can't have everything, eh?!

jenni

[guestmama9911]

Originally Posted by quarteralien

I remember one gay student (yes, they do exist at BYU) basically writing his suicide letter to the school paper, and his cousin writing in after he had died to point fingers at all homophobic members of the church who drove him to suicide. Very strange time. No wonder I hadn't thought about it lately.

I have never understood the concept of a gay Mormon. Why insist on being a member of a church led by a leader you don't believe speaks for God?

[quarteralien]

There are those who have homesexual attractions, but don't act on it. They also have testmonies of the gospel. I remember reading a Sunstone article years ago by a gay Mormon about all the torment he went through in his life trying to reconcile his feelings with his testimony. He mentioned another gay Mormon he met who passed out Books of Mormon to everyone he knew and told them about the gospel, because he believed he himself was too far gone, having acted on his gay persuasion too many times, but he didn't want to deprive others of the knowledge he had. I didn't agree with the author's eventual conclusion, which was that he would find a man and have a relationship, but it was eye-opening for me to realize just how much of a struggle it is for some people, that it isn't just a matter of saying "I'm not going to be gay." I don't really understand it, as I've never experienced it, but I also respect those who despite that trial still try to live the gospel.

[Moonprysm]

Originally Posted by alisaterry

I have never understood the concept of a gay Mormon. Why insist on being a member of a church led by a leader you don't believe speaks for God?

Because some people don't believe it's and all or nothing thing as you apparently do. Just because I get impatient and swat at my son despite the fact that I believe it to be absolutely wrong doesn't mean I'm no longer a mother. It's that very blind "I'll believe absolutely anything I'm told" mentality that leads to the belief by mainstream society that mormonism is more like a cult than a religion. That was even one of DH's biggest fears about me joining the church. No one is perfect and I will never pretend that they are. If I pray with a sincere heart and get a different answer, I chalk it up to people being human. I'm not going to drink the coolaid, but it doesn't mean that I believe that everything that's said is a lie.

[quarteralien]

Tiffani, I'm sorry you believe us to be blindly following the prophet. I think Jenni pointed you earlier to John 7:17

If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself.

I think it goes along well with Alma 32.

26 Now, as I said concerning faith—that it was not a perfect knowledge—even so it is with my words. Ye cannot know of their surety at first, unto perfection, any more than faith is a perfect knowledge.
27 But behold, if ye will awake and arouse your faculties, even to an experiment upon my words, and exercise a particle of faith, yea, even if ye can no more than desire to believe, let this desire work in you, even until ye believe in a manner that ye can give place for a portion of my words.
28 Now, we will compare the word unto a seed. Now, if ye give place, that a seed may be planted in your heart, behold, if it be a true seed, or a good seed, if ye do not cast it out by your unbelief, that ye will resist the Spirit of the Lord, behold, it will begin to swell within your breasts; and when you feel these swelling motions, ye will begin to say within yourselves—It must needs be that this is a good seed, or that the word is good, for it beginneth to enlarge my soul; yea, it beginneth to enlighten my understanding, yea, it beginneth to be delicious to me.

I believe these are good steps toward knowing for yourself if what the prophet says is true. And then the Spirit can manifest to you on hearing the words of the prophet whether or not they are true. I truly and honestly hope and pray for you to gain this testimony.