I will try to say this as objectively as I can. I will even make it apply to the topic. What Steve, Ian, and whoever else agrees with them might not understand, is that the judgement you place on me is inappropriate, outside of your stewardship, devoid of adequate knowledge of the facts, spoken out of defense, and out of self-interest. Here is apostolic validation for what I am saying, if that is the only thing that interests you. https://www.lds.org/ensign/1999/08/judg ... g?lang=eng
Even the Savior, during His mortal ministry, refrained from making final judgments. We see this in the account of the woman taken in adultery. After the crowd who intended to stone her had departed, Jesus asked her about her accusers. “Hath no man condemned thee?” (John 8:10). When she answered no, Jesus declared, “Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more” (John 8:11). In this context the word condemn apparently refers to the final judgment (see John 3:17).
The Lord obviously did not justify the woman’s sin. He simply told her that He did not condemn her—that is, He would not pass final judgment on her at that time. This interpretation is confirmed by what He then said to the Pharisees: “Ye judge after the flesh; I judge no man” (John 8:15). The woman taken in adultery was granted time to repent, time that would have been denied by those who wanted to stone her.
The Savior gave this same teaching on another occasion: “And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world” (John 12:47).
From all of this we see that the final judgment is the Lord’s and that mortals must refrain from judging any human being in the final sense of concluding or proclaiming that he or she is irretrievably bound for hell or has lost all hope of exaltation.
Would that I was committing adultery! It is so much more petty than that. I'm figuratively being stoned for my stance in politics. I understand that we do not agree on many policies, but it gives no license to over analyze my sentiments (whether they be angry, sad, happy or whatever) to be WRONG. If you want to learn one key communication skill, it is this. I'm telling you this for your spouse's and children's sake. Never challenge a person's feelings. Never prescribe a person's feelings. Never project your own feelings onto another person. Feelings are never necessarily right, or wrong. They just are. And yes, I know you will quote the "natural man" scripture if I use the term "natural", (which shows such utter lack of maturity and convenient use of a literal interpretation to cut me down) but I am using it anyways because, again, there is absolutely nothing "wrong" about it. There is nothing wrong with being mad. There is nothing wrong with being sad. (Do you remember that I said my feelings were in response to a tragedy
? Did you think I was just saying that?) This all should be obvious. But apparently it's not. If you think that it is healthy to suppress anger and sadness, then I am genuinely concerned for the people you deal with on a daily basis. And, even though I have said multiple times that I am not a psychiatrist, Ian has chosen to capitalize on his disdain for psychology with almost every comment he makes to me now. This is the tactic of a lawyer on the defense, not the action of a brother.
I'm not being dramatic in the slightest when I realize that this is falling upon deaf ears. I should know better than to keep trying with people who give me zero credibility. But you know what, I know that is your choice.
Go ahead and take the last word, tell me I'm wrong, etc. etc. I've said what I have to say.