Wait ... She LITERALLY said she would rather have her child DIE rather than have HER AS A PARENT have to deal with the burden of her child's addiction.Roy wrote:
"In conclusion the bishop's wife mentioned that she has her own trial that has been ongoing for the last 10 years and shows no sign of resolution. How she would love to be released from that emotional burden and have that child "return." I knew from my talk with the bishop that she was referencing her son that has embarked on a path of addiction and crime for the last decade."
How come in LDS society, this is an acceptable comment? We don't talk this way about caring for ventilator-dependent quadriplegic children. We don't talk this way about other burdens that life hands us.
If life is about trials, making mistakes, and learning through experiences, shouldn't we claim our children .. No matter what their struggles?
Recently, our RS president was talking about her oldest son and his wife who have left the church. I asked if they had children. She said, "Thankfully no. It would be terrible if they decided to have children." I had to blink for a minute, and process the statement.
1 -- If your child leaves the church, they should never reproduce.
2 -- If your child have a drug or legal/criminal problem, it would be better for them to just die.
Wow. Hardliners ..
I like to think that as long as there is life there is hope. Once life is gone, change in this life is not possible. But until life is gone, the potential for change remains. Keep praying for change .. NOT for death.