I already posted this on the board, but I kind of wanted
 

to get the Guard's take on this as well.

How strict would you beon the temple recommend issue when dating? I had a very interesting discussion with two friends yesterday.
Friend A has always been a card carrying member, and is now married.

Friend B has been card carrying in the past, but now has turned into a bit of a Jack Mormon, and has never been married.

They are both in their mid-thirties.

Friend A believes that if someone does not have a TR they should immediately be dismissed as a worthwhile option. If at some point down the road they regain their TR at that point in time they MAY be considered a worthwhile option. However, Friend A believes that someone who has always had a TR should look for a companion without any kind of "history or baggage" to marry, and therefore the repentant suitor should still be denied consideration.

Friend B believes that not being a card carrying member is a yellow light, not a red light, and a series of questions should be presented to the individual in question, in order to ascertain why there is no current TR. Friend B believes that factors to take into consideration include:
Nature of the issue
Length of time sans a TR
Age of the individual in question
Degree of honesty and willingness to be open about the issue
Steps being taken to correct the problem
Friend B's conclusion is that unless the individual is doing nothing to address some very serious trangressions they should still be considered a viable option.

Friend A believes that there are people who keep covenants, and people that break them and if they're already breaking covenants, it's time to turn and run.

Friend B believes that good people sometimes break covenants, and are oft times looking for a reason or motivation to get things back on track and be who they really want to be.

I'm kind of torn on this one. I was completely unable to take a side on the matter. I can see both sides of the argument. So what's your take?

My take is that I probably couldn't tolerate friend A. I think friend B has the reasonable approach.

At this point, I'd just take the first person to say yes.

so how does it come up in the course of dating?

"So do you have your temple recommend on you?"

An excellent question that was also discussed, and although it sounds odd, all of us had been in that situation where we were somehow made aware of the fact that someone we were dating, on a date with, interested in, being pursued by, etc. did not have a tr.

I was never aware of whether any of my dates had TRs.

I had one kinda-date who was driving and went through a half-dozen red lights, gratuitously. I'm pretty sure she didn't have a TR.

I think part of why I've been made aware is because I am a bit of a Molly Mormon, and pretty sure I put out that vibe. So I think they want to just get it out in the open, and find out upfront whether or not it's a deal breaker.

I think you'd be able to ascertain more info on someone after a few dates than the info of temple recommend yes or no would give you. Also I may be old fashioned, but love seems like it ought to have a place in this equation. Also friend A is a beeotch and her friendship is no doubt bringing you down. I would get some space from her.

I had a friend who was very picky about dates and getting married. Sort of like I imagine you BDB. I thought he was an idiot about all of it, and should have married at least a couple of his girlfriends (one or the other, not both at the same time). He would always break up with them over superficial little things, and then get really upset when they got engaged to other guys later.

So I lost touch with him for a few years, and finally got back in touch. He finally did get married. And his wife was an exotic looking hottie.

I guess his plan was a good one after all.

I would ask Friend A how many window's have been broken in his/her glass house throughout the course of his/her life.