Leaderboard

Not really. Effectively, nuclear power is unlimited. If we extracted uranium from seawater (which would cost ten times as much as mining it, but still be waaaaaaaay cheaper than anything else), it will naturally replenish itself for hundreds of thousands of years with no diminution in the uranium seawater concentration. And we can always use thorium as a breeder material, which is about FOUR HUNDRED times more common than the uranium used in reactors. The key is to abandon the horrific solid pellet fuel reactors that today constitute 100% of all nuclear plants and move to molten salt reactors. This would boost efficiency (because the reactor runs much hotter), be immensely safer, and solve almost all of MoE's nightmares.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/15/business/jack-ma-996-china/index.html It's easy to criticize the blindness, foolishness, and outright stupidity (or even evil) of the opposition party. This is all the rage (no pun intended) today, perhaps especially with the left end of the spectrum, but certainly not confined there. Sometimes it's worthwhile to ponder why the opposition mindset arose in the first place. In this case, Republicans and conservatives in general would do well to remember why things like labor unions even exist.

I have no plans to see it in the theater. If my daughter asks to be taken to it, my wife, @Dollfacekilla has offered. Maybe it'll be good. Maybe. Problem is Episode 7 only looks good when compared to 8. It still wan't a great movie, and now here's the same director who made that one back to do it again, only with his vision all screwed up and broken by Rian "Subverting Expectations" Johnson. I'd rather watch Episode 1 in an all-day loop than to pay to go see one more Disney Star Wars movie. **SPOILERS** As for the trailer... yeah, it's Jedi porn followed by some images and audio that seem to be aimed at going back to the Original Trilogy well yet again. "Come see it, you older guys! Look, Billy Dee Williams is back! Look, we're robbing the Emperor's Grave to convince you that there'll be something worth seeing in this film! DIDJA NOTICE THE WRECKAGE OF THE DEATH STAR IN THE BACKGROUND??? DON'T YA WANNA KNOW HOW IT GOT THERE?!?!?!?!?!?" No, Disney. I really don't care to know. Thus far you have not failed to take a steaming dump on just about every single element of the Original Trilogy that you've used to bait me into your garbage Star Wars films. You killed Han Solo in the most anticlimactic and predictable sci-fantasy death since Kirk got a bridge dropped on him. You turned Leia into Mary Poppins, you spaced Ackbar, you turned Lando Calrissian into a robosexual, and you turned the greatest sci-fantasy character of all time into a bitter, crusty old hermit and then killed him in an apparent crowning moment of awesome that turned out to be entirely illusory. So no, Disney, I'm not the least little bit interested in what you plan to do with the old Death Star, Luke's Voice, Lando or Palpatine. If that really is a hunk of the Death Star, why don't you just take it and cram it where the sun don't shine.

It’s interesting how the way some folks talk of Notre Dame as though it were a temple to the human spirit—an expression of human genius and achievement and capacity for beauty—rather than a structure devoted to the worship and glorification of some higher being, as its creators intended. I believe that such discourse might be termed “appropriation”. Or better yet, “ideological colonialism”. I realize it’s very early, but Isaiah 9:9-10 seems apropos.

https://www.ksl.com/article/46530636/byu-students-plan-sit-in-to-protest-honor-code-after-viral-instagram-account-petition-seek-reform I roll my eyes at the demands of these youngsters. I hope the Honor Code stands firm. Perhaps the tattlers need some talking to. But these protesters seem ignorant of the fact that if BYU were to implement a "No Kissing on Campus" rule, they would have every right because they are a private university and can make their own rules. The ones that don't like it should go elsewhere and let the ones who will happily comply take their place. And why was there a need for a moment of silence to honor LGBTs???

Oh, I'm both being funny and serious. The show over which I've been obsessing for 8+ years is running it's final episodes before the series ends. And I'm finding unmistakable analogies between dealing with that, and bouncing through the 5 stages of grief. Conventions are ending, the musicians and artists are moving on to more inspirational pastures, it's a genuine loss (though not huge) and big change (when compared to other hobbies). Sorry - I hope you don't think I'm taking advantage of emotional capital or anything. The whole deal is impacting me more than perhaps it would a mature grown-up. Spending a year of changing my avatar seemed appropriate. Heh. This is me following points 3, 11, and 12 of the thread.

I thought I was being funny, but it sounds like you're serious. I'm sorry if things are hard for you, and hope it goes better. FYI, I'm almost never on Facebook and don't see anything going on with family or friends, because I suck.

Uranium concentration in seawater is limited by uranium solubility. This will remain constant (unless the oceans freeze or boil) through time; as we extract (relatively tiny) amounts of uranium from seawater, the concentration will drop (very minutely) and be replenished by the many diffuse uranium sources in the ocean beds. I did a quick Google search and found a not-too-old Forbes article that does a decent job of explaining what's up. https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2016/07/01/uranium-seawater-extraction-makes-nuclear-power-completely-renewable/#1e4ab9ee159a This Canadian Nuclear Association article (which cites the above-mentioned Forbes article) explains things pretty well.

Like my father, I have a long fuse, but once I reach my limit, temper control goes offline. Over time, I've learned to recognize when my fuse is getting short and that's when it's best to extract from the situation entirely.

To begin, and I mean no offense, but I am having a hard time believing this is actually an issue in light of the following statement, "If I run, next time he will call me a coward, I've seen this happen on Netflix. Where the bully chases the bullied." (emphasis mine) There are times when anger is justified. In the Book of Mormon we read about Captain Moroni and what is said regarding if all humans had been and were like unto him the very powers of hell would have been frustrated. We also know that Captain Moroni was "angry" and rightfully so when he put his life on the line to save the Nephites and then you have a Nephite who wants to be king and creates a type of civil war. Each situation should be handled according to the situation. You shared, "I really provoked my bully to hit me." If you provoke, by law you would still be protected if they move to physical aggression and then you protect yourself. By spiritual law, you provoked, and are held accountable before the Lord, and have need of repentance. Every situation will be different, some will have the same principles. Discover the principles by which we are governed and you will act appropriately. It is never wise to "provoke" your enemy. It is wise to use strategy. No one can avoid all conflicts. In the Book of Mormon, the Nephites were told the Lord would tell them when to fight and when to run, and we can also see when the Lord would tell them to be patient. Soft answers turn away wrath is a principle and is subject to situation and circumstance. I remember speaking with my sister once and I was maintaining a soft voice. Her response to my soft voice, "What are you trying to do?! You are only speaking softly to show you are better than me, or trying to make yourself better than me!" No, I was speaking softly in order to control my own frustration and anger, and so that I did not let my passions overrule me. There are times and seasons. Our responsibility is to grow line up line, precept upon precept, here a little and there a little until we have mastered ourselves. There was a time when the Lord whipped people out of his and his Father's house. There was a time when he allowed his body to be beaten and nailed to the cross without any anger. He is the exemplar and as long as you are seeking to become like Him, repenting when needed, then in time you will have answered all your questions and you will have principles and knowledge as to know when to run, when to fight, or when to be patient and stand your ground.

[edited] better?

You could always become a Republican and dream that everything will always eventually turn out to be alright - as long as we keep the government out of it. Or be ultra extreme like me and become a libertarian. The Traveler

For me personally it's when you compare the Prince to his other works that you start to see it. Let me give you an example from one of his more widely published, at the time, books Discoursi ""We know by experience that states have never signally increased either in territory or in riches except under a free government. The cause is not far to seek, since it is the well-being not of the individuals but of the community which makes the state great, and without question this universal well-being is nowhere secured save in a republic.... Popular rule is always better than the rule of princes." Compare that quote to this one from the Prince "Whatever you do, whatever measures you take, if the population hasn't been routed and dispersed so that its freedoms and traditions are quite forgotten, they will rise up to fight for those principles at the first opportunity; just as the Pisans did after a hundred years of Florentine dominion." It seems really odd to me that in most of his political works, like Discoursi, he argues about the benefits of liberty and how a free republic is the best way to preserve those liberties, but in the Prince he is arguing that you need to make sure to completely destroy your opponents so they forget their liberty and traditions. I don't claim to be a Machieavelli expert by any means, military history is more my specialty, but this and other examples seem to me to demonstrate exaguration. Especially when you remember that the Prince was not widely published while he was alive, while most of his other works were. Now I could easily be wrong, you can certainly find arguments to the contrary, but that's my view of things. If you're interested Garrett Mattingly explains the pro satire side of things pretty well in this article http://www2.idehist.uu.se/distans/ilmh/Ren/flor-mach-mattingly.htm

I'm not sure that's feasible with the long commutes many people have. Within a short range and high population, I think a push for greater use of (and improved) public transit is a good idea... but for longer commutes the problem is this: I live almost exactly at the midpoint between Washington DC and Baltimore. If I commute to work in Baltimore, I may be one of hundreds from my area going up there, but we all have different final destinations. Carpooling is useful if there are others in the same building who happen to live in the same neighborhood, but that tends not to be the case. It didn't seem to be directed at us, no worries. Still, it's never a bad idea to be extra clear about stuff. Thanks!

@Mores @unixknight and others. Do not hold your breath waiting for new refineries. Federal (including environmental) regulations make new refineries impossible. This is not all bad - living next to (in the neighborhood of) a refinery is a death sentence. With the pressure of the "Green new Deal" do not bet your paycheck (money) on gas prices going down in the long run. I am not advocating the Green new Deal - which would be a dawn of another "Dark Ages" but we do need to rethink a few things. We need to break the habit of running around with one person in a car - it should be the great exception not the rule. Freeways should have 4 HOV lanes and one LOV (low occupancy vehicle) lane. Here is a thought and political argument for revealing current political stupidity. The one ever increasing factor to pollution (climate change) that is never actually politically addressed is population growth. In the USA the single most contribution to population growth is immigration - including both legal and illegal. It is foolish and stupid to attempt or pursue any "Green Deal" and ignore illegal immigration. We cannot have "Greenness" and massive population growth fueled by ever increasing immigration - unless of course we eliminate (significantly) already existing populations. Anyone, especially politicians, that support both greenness and increased immigration (especially illegal immigration) are outright lying about what they know or are trying to accomplish. Just from the standpoint of pollution (and climate change if that is important to you) - there should not be even one person illegally in this country. Politically - believing in (or thinking of) doing something about climate change (or any pollution for that matter) and living in (supporting in any way) a sanctuary city or concept friendly to illegal immigration is proof that you are too stupid to vote or participate in any political arena. (please note the last paragraph is not directed towards @Mores or @unixknight) The Traveler

Having worked the phones for the USPS—Delivery conformation is worthless; it just means they scan it before leaving it on your porch. Signature confirmation isn’t really much better because they often don’t verify who’s actually signing. If you’re sending something valuable via USPS, send it registered. It’s slower and more expensive, but much more secure—if no one signs for it, they don’t leave it; you get real-time tracking; and I’m pretty sure it has insurance built into the service. By the way, the postal clerks who died on the Titanic were last seen trying to haul the registered mail to a higher deck as the ship’s mail room flooded.

Kinda? The big issue in the U.S. is that when Three Mile Island happened, people went nuts and panic set in even though the actual amount of radiation that leaked out was less than a single medical X-ray, and that's if you were standing right at the fence line of the plant. That didn't stop the media (which was sensationalist even back then) from running stories to scare people and get people to tune in. (Essentially, clickbait before there were clicks.) The other big scare was Chernobyl, though if one knows anything about the way nuclear reactors are designed and the difference between U.S. and Soviet designs, it's easy to see why an accident like that can't really happen here.* I'm not sure parts interchangeability would be the fix, though I don't see that as a bad thing. Also, they can be privatized and regulated. No reason we can't have the best of both worlds. It's also worth noting that because of such tight regulation, nuclear power plants actually result in less radiation release into the atmosphere than coal burning power plants. It's true. Coal plants often burn coal that contains radon gas, which isn't regulated by the EPA or the NRC because the radon is naturally occurring. The coal is burnt in the plant and the radiation is released into the atmosphere. To switch from coal plants to nuclear plants would result in less radiation released into the atmosphere. My source on that? A conversation with a former engineer at a nuclear power plant in my state. It's understandable to be concerned about a hundred nuclear plants in the U.S., but keep in mind that the Navy runs more reactors than that in our warships. Every single submarine in the fleet, whether it's an attack sub or a ballistic missile sub, runs on nuclear power. Our entire fleet of aircraft carriers do as well. According to Wikipedia, we currently have 11 supercarriers, each of which is powered by two reactors, plus 69 nuclear submarines with one reactor apiece. That's a total of 91 in current service, not counting ones under construction. Only one nuclear powered U.S. Navy sub has been lost and that was back in the '60s, and it wasn't due to a reactor problem as far as we know. *The reason Chernobyl happened and why that can't happen here is in the design of the reactor. Soviet reactors were just scaled up versions of the reactors used in their nuclear submarines. One feature of their reactor cores is they use carbon to absorb stray neutrons from the reaction. The Chernobyl power plant was running a safety test with the reactor improperly configured. As a result, the carbon caught fire and the pressure from the heat caused the reactor to blow apart. It was not a nuclear explosion. Carbon burns really really well, and the burning carbon released all the trapped radiation into the atmosphere in a very dirty cloud of smoke. What do we do in the U.S.? Instead of carbon to absorb trapped neutrons, we just use water.

I'm a basket case on nuclear power. This is one I actually don't want privatized, because the best way to keep it sustainable is to have every plant operate with the same design and interchangeable parts. That, of course, means regulation. One of the reasons the U.S. nuclear industry failed is that each plant was uniquely designed, and getting replacement parts was time consuming and expensive. Most of the nuclear plants in Canada and Europe are similar enough that they can trade parts. But then I also get concerns about the number of nuclear plants we would need to build. If each nuclear plant can support about 1 million households, we'd need about 100 nuclear plants to support our current needs. As we build more, we open more doors for an catastrophic event. That concerns me a bit. But I want it!

Brother, I feel for you, just as we all do. You make a very convincing case for why our system needs a ton of work. Other have mentioned parts of what's causing the problems and I agree with them. Nobody's saying the system here is perfect. In fact I don't know anyone who says it is. What I'm saying (and I believe what others here are saying also) is that we believe the remedy for the problems is NOT to hand everything over to the Government. Doing so would only be trading one set of problems for another, and the set we'd be getting are worse than what we have already. I'm glad you have the option to get what you need elsewhere. I think that's a good example of the kind of freedom we want to maintain. It's a shame it's too expensive here and that's a problem we need to address. I have my own ideas on why prices for medical care in this country are so high and I've seen some movement in the Government to address that. (Transparency in cost being one example.)

Remember how people were kvetching that the film’s marketing was stunted because the Social Media Fast took place right in the middle of its premiere? At the time I thought that was coincidence, and I delighted in the Mormon Left’s paranoia. Now, I’m wondering if I shouldn’t have delighted in President Nelson’s foresight and wileyness.

Yes, many of them. I am the weird uncle in the family after all. Thanks, -Wade Englund-

I think the close correlation between what Machiavelli wrote and the way the Medici's governed lends support to the idea that it was not intended to be satire.

One news report here mentioned that the roof was made of 5,000 oak trees which have had 850 years to dry out. Leaders of the two main political parties here have committed Australia to making a contribution to the rebuilding and restoration of the cathedral. Some people here have reacted angrily to that saying the Catholic Church should first make reparations for all the harms arising from the clergy abuse cases before any public money is given to them for any purpose. I suspect that both the politicians who made the commitment, and the people who have reacted angrily might not have been aware that the structure is owned by the French government. I'm wondering now, after seeing the profound grief and sense of loss caused to this iconic structure whether similarly iconic structures will now become even more of a target for terrorists - harming the icons looks like an effective way to hurt the people.

Okay, my heart goes to you and your family for all the medical troubles you have. I used to work for Blue Cross and Blue Shield back in the 90's. Back then, we receive Oral & Maxo claims a lot. There are procedures that BCBS PPO/et. al. covers and there are procedures that the Dental insurance covers. I know BCBS covered sleep apnea related jaw surgery. So I'm gonna say it is safe to assume that they covered jaw necropsy. I don't know what changed from the 90's to today. (Obamacare maybe?). Anyway, how that usually worked was that the O&M surgeon's office run the codes through both Medical and Dental insurance plans (BCBS carries both) and the things that the dental plan covers gets rejected by the medical plan and vice versa. Where we usually get rejected claims that cause a huge headache for everybody is when the O&M surgery is a result of a car accident. This one gets pingpong'd between BCBS and the car insurance. Another headache is when there are 2 insurance plans one of which is not BCBS (e.g. both husband and wife have a family plan) - it gets pingpong'd then too. $2300 per month with $110,000 out of pocket is TERRIBLE insurance! Before Obamacare, I had Hospital and Surgical Only insurance (BCBS). I paid $120 per month for a family of 4 non-smoking non-drinking no-chronic-illness and no-pregnancy-coverage plan. No copays, no deductibles. Your jaw surgery and your hospitalization would have been covered 100% no out of pocket expenses. Obamacare made that insurance plan illegal so I lost the plan. I put $380 per month on an HSA which I used to pay for well-check visits, non-hospitalization-or-surgery-related meds, etc. That HSA got eliminated too because our new insurance plan didn't qualify for HSA. This is the MAIN PURPOSE for insurance. FOR CATASTROPHIC events. An insurance plan that covers well-checks and ear infections but doesn't cover catastrophic care or has an unaffordable deductible/copay is a useless plan. THAT is the problem. IT SHOULDN'T. Obamacare MADE THAT WORSE. Now, you put medical care in the hands of inefficient government and you'll have... the VA. Where the insurance company doesn't have power over you anymore, the government does instead. My father survived lung cancer for 4 years. He did not carry insurance. He got treatment from a clinical trial and the rest all his children and his brothers and sisters helped pay for. Other than his doctors in the trials, he had my brother as his primary care doctor, and my sister his primary care and home health nurse. So we didn't have to pay for doctors/nurses. He could have survived a lot longer than 4 years but he was tired and left the clinical trials and refused medication after that. My father's brother had colon cancer, my aunt had ovarian cancer, my other aunt breast cancer (yes, it runs in the family) - all without insurance. My uncle passed away after over 20 years of the cancer. Both my aunts are still alive and in remission. They all stayed in the Philippines and the family helped pay for their treatments. In the Philippines, if your family is a specialty doctor (my brother and my uncle are specialty doctors), you can do a service exchange with other specialty doctors and their family. And because my brother is affiliated with several hospitals, we get massive hospital discounts. So our big ticket was the infusions and meds. None of us have gone bankrupt with all those cancer patients in the family. Yet. I'm going to say this again - insurance that covers ear infections but not catastrophic care is a useless insurance.

My heart is broken. I've been there, and whatever else can be said about the loss of historical artifacts, which deeply saddens me as well, you could feel the faith in Christ of those who had built it, almost infused in the stone. This is a tragic loss for humanity.

Without going into too much detail: My family has used Liberty HealthShare. We are very happy with the results, inevitable red tape notwithstanding. Despite a couple of serious and unanticipated medical emergencies, we have been treated very well. Liberty HealthShare has both my gratitude and my recommendation. In our current screwed-up health care system, this seems like a very reasonable alternative, maybe the most reasonable. (Fair warning: They won't cover pre-existing conditions for some initial period, maybe years long. I'm not sure.) I would point out to my lawyer friend that health share organizations are most definitely not HMOs in any legal sense. My understanding is that they are essentially unregulated, and at least in principle can deny health care payments for any reason they might choose. In my family's experience, Liberty HealthShare has been extremely honest and shown nothing but integrity (again, red tape notwithstanding, and there's a bunch of red tape). But there are few legal guarantees, so choose wisely and keep your eyes wide open.

@Scott, I’m sorry to hear about all you e been going through. Out of curiosity, have you tried one of those “Christian healthcare ministries” that are basically non-profit HMOs? Anecdotally, I hear they are much better to work with as long as you aren’t dealing with a “vice-related” medical condition.

I once read a column (or maybe just a comment) that the devastation and "lost generation" of WWI and the horrors of WWII in France led directly to a widespread loss of faith and belief in God, not only in France but throughout Europe. I think this is vastly oversimplified, but I don't doubt that the two unspeakably brutal world wars likely served as a catalyst to hasten the atheism that was already growing fashionable in Europe by the end of the 19th century. Even in Italy, the seat of Roman Catholicism, I found (thirty-plus years ago) that many people were cultural Catholics only, and that their nativist pride had much more to do with the art, architecture, music, and glorious history associated with Catholicism than with religion itself. So if many Europeans react with a "ho-hum" or a "tough luck" to news of the loss of Notre Dame de Paris, I guess that's just part of the attitude of modern-day Europe.

The particularly interesting facet here is that IIRC, the Catholic Church doesn’t own Notre Dame; the French government does—with the Church basically having a sort of perpetual grant of use.

@MormonGator I have lots of friends in UK who are very upset by this, and mostly its non members I have had comments from. Its sickening how quickly fire can destroy what took over 200 years to build. Every time I have visited I have been struck by the symbolism and how my students react in a reverent manner despite not being from religious backgrounds. Maybe those closest to it take it forgranted and treat sacred things more casually (reminds me of a conference talk ) Christianity has been in disrepair for so long in Europe, but those who cling to their faith are special people. I was shocked when I lived in the US how much easier it is to talk about religion and how often the topic comes up in comparison to the UK

If there were only one economic, job-related lesson I could go back in time and teach myself, it would probably be: Play to your strengths. I would have been far more successful by worldly measures if I had done so. It's not unlikely that I would have been more successful in spiritual endeavors by following this advice, as well.

(Sorry to nitpick... closer to 800 years.) I suspect that will be the case, if the stone façade can stand without the structure holding it up. The problem isn't just the wooden timbers, but the iron in the structure losing its strength from the heat. This is a loss for us too. I once heard a story in which one of the Apostles commented that one day (during the Millenium?) all such structures would be converted into Temples. This was always the one I pictured. I don't know if that story is true, but it was a comforting thought.

But I watched the trailer because it was popping up left and right on my youtube. So you see Rey. With a lightsaber. Jumping over a TIE fighter. And I laughed my Leia buns off... I guess JJ Abrams is embracing the Mary Sue-ness of his Mary Sue. You hear Luke saying: We've passed to you all we know.... HA HAH HAH AH HAHA... my sides!!! I'm done with Star Wars. I mean, sure, I would like to know if JJ is gonna give us a Reylo. But I don't have to watch the movie to know that.

Heh I dunno I kinda see a sort of dark humor to it that may have landed on the contemporary audience. Hopefully there's a lot of exaggeration, though I suspect it's not as much as we'd like...

Worth noting is a very convincing view that "The Prince" was meant to be satire. You guys are exactly right. He wrote it tongue in cheek but it was so convincing that people took it seriously. Sort of like "A Modest Proposal" by Jonathon Swift. I find the evidence that Macchiavelli was just kidding when he wrote Il Principe to be compelling but not convincing. The treatise reads as a straightforward exposé, and the advice given is chillingly, cold-bloodedly direct and honest. I could perhaps believe it was written exactly for this purpose, to expose the motivations and machinations of European princes (and politicians of all stripes). But satire? Nope. There is nothing satirical about the work.

And none of you can spell it! Humour. Honestly!

I’ve had my beefs with HCO’s methods ever since I was a student there, and I understand some of the most obnoxious players are still employed by BYU twenty years later. I’m not inclined to defend their actions. But what gets me is, these student maggots are getting a $40K education for $5K, with the Church making up the difference; and they have the gall to say the honor code shouldn’t apply at all? I almost want to call their bluff: “Fine, you can go to BYU and not have the honor code apply to you, IF you are willing to pay market rate for your tuition. Otherwise, Honor Code still applies.” Let’s see how many of these entitled, narcissistic, oversexed brats take that deal.

I have 4 boys wanting to attend BYU who are more than willing and happy to adhere to the existing Honor Code. Please pluck 4 ungrateful 'actual*' BYU student protestors from the crowd and send them packing, my boys will take their spot instead. Private University, their rules. *how many of the supposed 'protestors' are actually BYU students anyways, seriously.

I'm not a woman. I imagine some sisters may share their thoughts shortly. One item to consider is your ability to order a variety of different tops, for the purposes of trying them out, and then simply return the ones that don't conform to your body type. If you live near a distribution center you can do this in person - try before you buy. Good Luck. New Options in Women’s Garments Offer Better Fit

Update: thank you so much to everybody for the advice and love. We went in last night to the Bishop and confessed and have started the repentance process. We do already feel so much better. I don’t know exactly what the future holds for us yet, but I know that I’m going back to the path that I belong. Love to you all!!

Sure, that would be great. I have lots of doubt. On the contrary, there is plenty of reason to think exactly that. Why do you think this? I think this statement is obviously false. For God, all things are eternal, including "temporal ramifications". None of these obvious statements are in any way relevant to the topic of discussion. That there are ten zillion unfit heterosexual parents in no way provides evidence that homosexual parents are just dandy. And I would much rather have a child raised by biological abusive parents than by wolves. What of it? That's immaterial.

Think it can't happen...look at the Boy Scouts and tell them that they didn't have this happen to them, or multiple other organizations that had a parent with custody approve something for a child and have the LGBTQ come right back at them and sue the pants off of them. The reason I saw the policy applied in the first place is due to the judicial activism the LGBT groups have been taking. They are FAR more active in this arena and aggressive than just about any other group out there. They also win quite a bit.

I think it’s been pretty easy for apologists to categorize past policies as, at least, being appropriate for the time and place in which they existed. This one is harder, because as @Midwest LDS says—what has changed in the last three years, really? (Other than, the mass apostasy of featherweight Mormons who couldn’t reconcile themselves to the 2015 policy. Hmm, maybe that’s it. Maybe it was supposed to be another “Zion’s Camp”/wheat-versus-tares sort of moment . . .)

I'm really struggling with this policy change. I'm really trying not to, but I remember President Nelson talking about the last change being revelation. A revelation that only lasts 3 years? An action that leads to seperation from God for eternity is no longer apostasy? I don't want to feel shook, I don't like this feeling. I'm just glad I know this is Christ's church, this would be really hard without my testimony in Christ.

I have no regrets.

Work in physics or mechanical engineering for a while, and you will quickly decide that millimeters are far superior to mils. Handy reference: A liter of water (or blood, or serum, or body tissue) has a mass of one kilogram. Also, a gallon of water weighs eight pounds. Which is easier and more useful for top-of-the-head calculations? I'm not really a metric evangelist. I just know an easier, more logical system when I see it. ...says the statistician. Does this give anyone else the shivers?

Unless you live in a country that uses the metric system, I don't think you can claim not to be on the dark side.

I hear "Rey" is short for her real name, Meh Reisu. (Accent on the last syllable, naturally.)

If we're talking about @mirkwood it really needs to be two brewers. One would not suffice.