Based on this document which appears to outline celestial marriage, and LDS temple rites pertaining to the eternal sealing of husbands and wives; children as well, born after the sealing of a husband and wife, are said to be partakers; 'born in the covenant', or, having been born before the sealing, through provision of temple rites, can be sealed to the covenant of their parents; what is to be done with these words of Jesus Christ.
The same day came to him the Sadducees, which say that there is no resurrection, and asked him, Saying, Master, Moses said, If a man die, having no children, his brother shall marry his wife, and raise up seed unto his brother. Now there were with us seven brethren: and the first, when he had married a wife, deceased, and, having no issue, left his wife unto his brother: Likewise the second also, and the third, unto the seventh. And last of all the woman died also. Therefore in the resurrection whose wife shall she be of the seven? for they all had her. Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God. For in the resurrection, they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven. But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living. And when the multitude heard this, they were astonished at his doctrine. (Mat 22:23-33)
Thinking that they could find some error in the perfect doctrine of Jesus Christ, the Sadducees had designed to ensnare him, by a solicitation of his doctrine on the resurrection of the dead. I see, had he agreed with their position, being that, to them, there was no resurrection of the dead, they would have been content to take his part, in turning it to their advantage; a sharp disagreement between their sect, and the Pharisees; or equally content to have an open declaration from him on the matter, to give a doctrinal prerogative for their rejection of him.
A short personal aside, on that captivating matter-of-course; entering through the back door, while his adversaries guarded the front, in a figure of speech; their preoccupation with the expected answer, left them vulnerable to his triage of the matter.
Jesus begins first by addressing that particular pretext of theirs, a convoluted arrangement on their part; apparently to them, of no significance, but for the occasion it afforded. 'Ye do err', and though their expectation, as I said, being his answer to the resurrection, 'not knowing the scriptures' (I suspect the other half 'nor the Power of God', is in reserve for the ensuing 'as touching the resurrection of the dead') --'they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.'
How do Latter Day Saints perceive this, in regard to the LDS doctrine on divine confirmation of the figurative covenant of marriage, carried on in perpetuity? Being that it is in apparent opposition to the explicit revelation of Jesus Christ; in priority over, even the resurrection of the dead? (Feel free to strike the last two clauses, if you perceive an assertive veneer.)