NOM

Nice comments on the amazon review pages.

This one makes me chuckle.

One troubling story, however, was her struggle to understand why the children of gay parents could no longer be baptized. Perhaps if Sheri Dew understood the laws of nature, she would realize two members of the same sex could never have legal custody of their children unless one of them divorced a previous spouse, thus breaking one of the most important of God's commandments. This might also explain the reason why former first counselor in the Relief Society general presidency, Sister Carole M. Stephens, recently acknowledged that more than half (fifty-one percent) of the women in this church are currently single.

Does Sheri Dew really struggle with the policy? I doubt it only because it appears it's super convenient for selling more books. She's an opportunist and clearly hasn't wrestled with her faith. The only wrestling she's done is Monday Night Jello Wrestling with Wendy Watson Nelson while Elder Nelson cheers them on eating popcorn from his lazy boy recliner.

Generally, I only say this when I people feel the need to throw in their two-cents worth, but are misguided. If you aren't a trained professional in something like a faith crisis/transition or if you haven't been through one, yourself, you need to just zip it.

So, Sherri, MIL, God bless you, zip it. Just zip it.

I hope that it is okay to just mention this or ask a question about Sheri Dew..but I heard that she had already been sealed to a prophet. (Or will be)..does this sound familiar to any of you? This I have heard a few times..don't want to judge or mis-characterize her situation..but it has been in the rumor mill for quite some time.

I used to admire her...a shame that her business credentials and intelligence was put only to the use of the church.

desertrat wrote: ↑Mon May 15, 2017 9:27 pmWhen the policy was announced that the children of gay parents might not be eligible for baptism at age eight,

Announced? Curious euphemism for "leaked".











Unless she was saying that it was announced in a meeting she was in. But why? Why would she be invited to a meeting talking about a book only men are supposed to read?

Margarita wrote: ↑Fri May 19, 2017 9:31 am I hope that it is okay to just mention this or ask a question about Sheri Dew..but I heard that she had already been sealed to a prophet. (Or will be)..does this sound familiar to any of you? This I have heard a few times..don't want to judge or mis-characterize her situation..but it has been in the rumor mill for quite some time.

I used to admire her...a shame that her business credentials and intelligence was put only to the use of the church.

Rumors abound. Secret polygamous marriage (which I don't believe, but some do).

I AM lazy and want to sin but that's not why I stopped believing in mormonism. I stopped believing in mormonism because it's a fairy tale based on a much older fairy tale.

Spicy McHaggis wrote: ↑Wed May 24, 2017 8:47 am I AM lazy and want to sin but that's not why I stopped believing in mormonism. I stopped believing in mormonism because it's a fairy tale based on a much older fairy tale.

Let's be clear about the definitions of "lazy" and "sin" as used in your statement. Your are guilty of "sin" as defined only by the legal corporation headed by Thomas Monson. You are "lazy" only by not doing all the cultural and ecclesiastical activities defined by that same corporation. By that definition you (and all of us) are similarly "lazy and want to sin" as defined by Islam, since you don't pray to Mecca and eat bacon. You laziness with respect to Catholicism is evident with your lack of Praying the Rosary and eating steak on Friday. Jehovah's Witnesses see a long list of laziness and sin you are committing. Evangelicals have their own list of lazy sins condemning you.

However, those lazy and sinful Unitarians, Agnostics, Atheists, and other religious libertarians simply see you following the dictates of your own moral conscience, not the dictates published in the LDS Church Office Building.

Dravin wrote: ↑Tue May 16, 2017 6:42 am I love the double standard concerning doubt. If it's an investigator who is doubting say the Catholic church that doubt is good. Mormons wouldn't dream of telling said investigator that they should restrict their questions and investigations to talking with their priest, the Bible, and the catechism. If it's a Mormon who is doubting, they need to keep everything in house and if they ever reach the conclusion that Mormonism isn't true it's prima facie evidence they did it wrong.

Ding, ding, ding, ding!!!!

Dravin hit this nail squarely on the head!

I've made this blatant hypocrisy point several times myself.

Other people SHOULD doubt. Other people SHOULD question. Other people SHOULD NOT just trust correlated sources from their existing religion/opinion/philosophy.

Damn church couldn't quit lying and misrepresenting things if it freakin' tried! But I guess that works, because it will never try.