Leaderboard

MoE, with all respect and brotherly love, this is why people talk about lies and darned lies and statistics. —The median income figure you cite is for all workers, whether part or full time. Can we at least acknowledge that three-bedroom houses are inherently expensive, and that it is entirely proper that a couple who wants to live in one should at least be working forty hours between the two of them? And can we therefore also agree that when we are taking about median incomes in the context of home-buying, the median income we should be talking about is the median income for *full* time workers ($865/week, or $44,980/year, or a little over $3700/month) rather than the slimmer figures you cite that are apparently diluted by all the part-time workers? —Can we acknowledge that a single-income family of three with household income of $44,980 are nominally in the 22% federal bracket, but will also be getting deductions and child and earned income tax credits such that their effective federal tax income rate will be near zero? And can we then further acknowledge that their state taxes and social security, while not insubstantial, won’t be anywhere near 24%? —Can we acknowledge that most people don’t save for retirement and a first-home down payment simultaneously? —Can we acknowledge that a 20% down payment on a house is not at all normal; and that 5-10% is more typical these last few years? —Can we recognize that I ordinarily feed a family of 8 on under $1K/month in groceries ($788/month, as per the budgeting program on my phone), and that $300-$500/month in groceries for a family of three is probably pretty darned generous? I mean, I want to be compassionate and understanding when people say “we just can’t do it on one income”; but when I see people justifying themselves with proposed figures like the above—I am sometimes tempted to wonder if we are even living in the same universe. People keep telling me “JAG, it’s just not possible”—and then there’s me and my family, over in our little corner, just quietly doing it. The one thing I suspect gets missed in these conversations a lot—and I don’t mean this as a moral condemnation, just as an observation—but, I don’t think our society likes children as much as it used to. Sure, we fetishize them, we throw taxpayer funds at them, we make an academic discipline of their development, and in the political arena we bludgeon each other with ideas about the kind of world we want to build for them. But we don’t actually like them. When push comes to shove, we consider child-rearing to be full drudgery that should be someone else’s priority. We don’t make children, we don’t sacrifice our personal interests and resources to raise them, and on Friday nights we don’t say “hey, forget the bar/the movies/the night club/touch football/Call of Duty; tonight the cool thing to do is go play peek-a-boo and watch Thomas the Tank Engine reruns!” Again, I don’t mean this as a moral indictment; just an observation. There are people who temperamentally just aren’t suited to being around kids (or being around a lot of kids). Heck, in many ways I’m one of them; and ultimately that should be between each of us and God as we work out our own salvation. The stickiness comes from the fact that our theology links salvation/exaltation with child rearing so integrally, that it’s hard to openly eschew the latter without seeming to voluntarily renounce the former. So I suspect a lot of us in the Church do feel some social pressure to overplay the financial cost of child-rearing; because it’s much easier to tell ourselves and others that “I want to but I can’t” than to admit that “I just don’t want to” and be cross examined/judged about the fact that we just don’t want (very many) kids.

It's that phenomenon of people seeming to exist in "alternate universes". Where are you getting your info? Did you not see or hear about the huge rally again FOR Trump last weekend in DC? Are you not aware of the polls that have been taken on this? At least 70% of Republicans and even some Democrats believe there was wide spread fraud. https://www.politico.com/news/2020/11/09/republicans-free-fair-elections-435488 Might be time to step outside your own bubble to see what other people really think.

Some of these are fair criticisms. Adjusting the federal numbers up to 3700 per month and reducing the taxes to 5% (about 11% to federal and 4% to state/local) changes the monthly unused income to $489 per month. That $30,000 downpayment becomes accessible in just over five years. But with the caveat that transportation still isn't included in that value. And the caveat that the home price is still the typical value in the area I live in, which a fairly low cost of living area. The urban area 30 minutes north of me shows 2BR/1Bath houses starting around the $125k point. By comparison, this (admittedly cherry picked) 2BR 1.5 Bath in the Salt Lake area going into foreclosure and marked as for sale is listed at $280k. Sidenote, regarding some other criticisms of using a 3BR house in my targets, I figured a young couple starting out and planning for their future might be interested in a 3BR house if they wanted to have four kids, which doesn't seem unreasonable for a mormon family. I apologize that this assumption wasn't expressly stated in my work. As another form of comparison, this Census report shows the 1970 median household income was $8,730 per year. This inflation calculator places that value at 59,506.2 in today's dollars. I'm struggling to find an individual income median for a direct comparison, but if we operate on the belief that single income families were more common in the upper income levels then than they are now, my gut check guess is that a single income family probably has the equivalent of $600 less monthly income now than it did in 1970. Which all goes back to the original point, that regardless of which numbers you use, a single income has less purchasing power today than it did 50 years ago. By extension, making ends meet and accomplishing financial goals is harder on a single income today than it was 50 years ago. It seems reasonable to think that families might be making different decisions with regard to who works and who doesn't that reflect some of that lost purchasing power. Things not relevant to the main point: - A 20% down payment may not be normal, but I'd argue that is another symptom of the problem. Best practice by financial experts, as far as I understand, still encourage the 20% down payment because it saves money due to PMI. More importantly, it demonstrates the ability to save money for the unexpected expenses that comes with the maintenance on a house. Statistically speaking, the lower percentage the downpayment, the higher the risk of failing to keep up with payments. (another really complicated discussion, I know) - Not saving for retirement while saving to purchase a house is, in my estimation, a catastrophic strategic error. If your employer offers a match, you should contribute at least enough to max out that benefit. Early savings are king in retirement, and starting five to six years earlier makes an enormous difference after 30 years of saving. So whether or not it is common, it's the practice that should be encouraged.

Just because I know that people are frequently judgmental and unnecessary making calls about things they know little about, doesn't mean I have to like it or say something about it. I've seen this come up WAY to many time. Just one example off the top of my head: I've a good friend who's a devout LDS Christian and great mom. Her husband doesn't make much money, but they've alway felt it was important to have a parent home full time, so they made it work, literally counting every penny. Once all 4 kids were in school full time, my friend elected to take a teaching job at her kid's elementary school so that they could have a little extra money to save for mission funds/college/retirement, etc. This was an extremely prayerful and thought out decision for the entire family. After completing all of her teaching certifications & got hired, my friend excitedly told her ministering sister about the updates. To which her ministering sister instantly condemned her with "Women being out of the home is an invitation for Satan to come in". *WHAM* Now, do you think that my friend EVER shared anything with that sister again or trusted her in any way? No, the bridge was permanently burnt because this sister didn't care about the person/family and just judged where she had no dominion. These stories are not "those faceless crazy liberals" or anything like that. They are individuals and families, making calls on details only they know. Let us not judge them where we have no dominion.

Yup. Both my Father and Mother grew up in households with 8 and 9 people in the house. Each home had only 3 bedrooms. Everyone slept with their siblings. Each home had only 1 bathroom. In my last ward our Bishop had 5 kids...and they lived in a 3 bedroom home with only a minivan for transport. He took the bus or walked 2.5 miles to work every day. I am 34 years old with a stay at home wife and 4 kids at home, and my family is surviving on my modest income alone. Our 4 kids share rooms, our home is small, our vehicles are used, and our vacations consist of going camping. We do not spend our money frivolously. We make a budget and stick to it. There is no "standard of living" outside of what we choose the standard to be. We do not have to move our measuring stick to fit the world's ideals. Numbers and charts can be doctored to fit any narrative. The fact remains that people need to stop expecting to live beyond their means; that certain goods are required in today's society...because they aren't. Cuts should be made before a wife has to leave the home to work...she should only do so if truly necessary, as rearing her children always takes priority. Counsel from a man who became a prophet of God is below...yet there will always be those who continue to kick against the pricks..."what he said certainty doesn't apply to me...I am the exception". I would certainly work overtime if need be before I had my wife go to work and leave the children with someone else. "It is a human tendency to want the things which will give us prominence and prestige. We live in a time when borrowing is easy. We can purchase almost anything we could ever want just by using a credit card or obtaining a loan. …The day of reckoning will come if we have continually lived beyond our means. My brothers and sisters, avoid the philosophy that yesterday’s luxuries have become today’s necessities. They aren’t necessities unless we make them so. …I urge you to live within your means. One cannot spend more than one earns and remain solvent. I promise you that you will then be happier than you would be if you were constantly worrying about how to make the next payment on nonessential debt." Thomas S. Monson, Apr 2006 General Conference

All accusations he had leveled against him back when he ran the first time.. so nothing new there. It does appear he is out of time to Gain the Presidency. I do not think the House is going to challenge the College vote and I do not think the Courts will reverse it now... However I do not mind him continuing because and much as we are mortal and fraud will happen... I'm not ok with ignoring it, and his selfish interest are aligned with dealing with it at the moment.

How about we let God, whom knows the hearts and situation of every person and family, judge them?

Community is great, once they graduate college everything gets a little stale though. They also got rid of the dnd episode, which I was told was one of the best, due to a character painting his skin brown because he was a dark elf. Racist I guess?

I recently finished all 15 seasons of NCIS on Netflix. It took a looooong time to get through them all. Gotham is my favorite show based on comic books on Netflix. And I was thrilled when they picked up Community.

I'll be out for a while but wanted to address one item before I go as it relates to American's belief of widespread voter fraud. 1. 35% of GOP voters didn't believe the 2020 election was free and fair before the election. 2. 70-77% of Republicans now say they don’t believe the 2020 election was free and fair So, why the change? Some would like to lazily dismiss this change to the mindless Trumpling sheeple, holding Trump up as a demi-god, believing anything he utters. I don't doubt that their will be some who fall into this category. Sheeple occur on both sides of the aisle, Dem & Rep. Instead, I would attribute it more to the Republican's willingness/desire to actually watch the evidence presented during the 40+ hrs of legislative hearings that took place. I'm not sure how many Democrats cared to invest time into hearing the actual evidence first hand, if I had to guess, I would say very few. Each of us here can ask ourselves, "Did I actually watch any significant portion of the hearings... beyond internet memes, SNL skits, headlines and cherry picked snippets?" With the MSM suppressing the evidence that was presented, those caught in the MSM bubble would have little reason to believe there was widespread fraud. The MSM says there was nothing to see, their guy 'won'... life carries on for the left. In contrast, take every voting American and sit them down to watch some meaningful portion of the hearings (evidence, questioning & rebuttals)...................then take the poll again. Let's see what happens then. Of the people who don't believe their was widespread voter fraud, how many of them are victims of the MSM/Big Tech?

It is pretty systematic of the Democratic/Liberal party. Historically the Democratic and Republican parties have be roughly equal, swapping around the Presidency, and House and Senate Majorities. And Historically the Democratic party have tried to lay claim to the racial and other minorities... Trying to guilt the truly "Vast" majority into caring about the injustices they suffer and the complaints they have. This makes it very hypocritical of them to treat the Republican membership as if they do not exist and their concerns are irrelevant. For proof of this behavior I present the existence of Fox News as evidence. When the largely Democratic/Liberal big news orgs started ignoring half their market, market force dictated that some one would step in and fill the void. Thus Fox News is symptom of the largely Democratic/Liberal big news systematic neglect. The numbers do not lie. Most of the Republicans think there was fraud, Republicans make of of roughly half the population. This is a injustice (even if you think it is only their minds) that affects more people then all the racial and LGBQT (Or whatever the name is currently) issues. Yet despite this he says "Vast" majority does not think there was fraud, and the only way this comment make any sense is if for him Republican lives do not matter. While the Democratic/Liberal parties are celebrating the removal or Trump, they fundamentally misunderstand that Trump was not the cause whose removal fixes things. He was and is a symptom. Since the root cause still exists and has not been dealt with, it will simply manifest another way

Heh, like when Obama was President.

My wife had an established career before we converted. I don't see that changing, nor do I believe she is a less involved mother. I believe she just kills herself trying to do both. If we'd grown up in the Church, or met before she had a career, we likely would have done things differently.

And as I said if we focus/fixate on just one we slip into error. Another is the problematic conflation is idea that Primary = Sole (as the example you shared) This is simply false and not supported. For example my wife is the Primary Nurturer of my children... If she was the Sole Nurturer I would be getting reamed out up, down, left, right and by anyone and everyone, and deservedly so. But just because I can and do... do the role does not mean I am the Primary provider, as my kids amply demonstrate when they will pass right by me like I am not there to go to their mother when they need something. Yet for some people only the man can provide financially and he must do it Solo... which is not supported. The only warning when being a equal partner helping your spouse is that you do not neglect/reduce your primary role (Unless you have need for the death/disability/Other adaptation) The big problem I see isn't people figuring out was works best for them.. the problem I see is culturally we think we need more then we really realistically do. We do not have to look back that far into our history to see examples of people doing just fine with much much less.

Holy goodness that is a great quote

I completely agree with this statement here. Presently I am pondering on printing out some spiritual writings I have gathered over the years. Right now they are only in digital format with multiple copies on hard drive and flash drives. I do not like storing data on the Internet cloud because of your lack of control of it.

Its a question for any who think the Supreme Court may have neutered itself and made its rulings irrelevant. I think if the Court and its rulings become irrelevant and unenforceable, that will be because of a decision by the people and their political rulers rather than as a result of any actions by the Court itself. Any thought or intention of making the court and its rulings irrelevant and unenforcable seems to be about the same thing as a thought or intention not to be ruled by law and reason.

And that is where I choose to stop judging. However, keep this in mind. Maybe this thought experiment can put this into perspective and reveal the reality of such situations. A man living in a cave and he is given a jug of water every day. He has to use that water for himself, the garden he is growing so he doesn’t starve, and to put in a mini hydronic dam that powers the lights in his home. At the end of the day, there is not enough to do everything and he cries out “but I didn’t have enough water to keep myself hydrate, that’s why I’m dying!”. That won’t change the fact that he is dying. Perhaps he could have used less water to grow his food and sacrificed some food to stay hydrated longer, perhaps he was over using the lights? We don’t know cause we don’t know how much water was there so we can’t really make a good judgment. the same can be said about a family with limited time and resources. Do you provide for your family financially? Spiritually? Relationally? Whatever you neglect is going to suffer. In these cases, it is up to the parents to decide what the best decision is. In an ideal world, we all have enough time to provide for everything adequately, but that is not always the case. (On a somewhat side note, my opinion on church welfare has changed drastically. If a father cannot be home to be with his family because he has to work, it is time to let go of pride and reach out to the church for aide.) When it comes to mothers having a career and having children, they are always deciding that the time they spend at work is more important than the well being of the relationship they have with their kids. Whether this is true and it is the only source of wealth or if it is based in a desire to have nice stuff, that isn’t up to us to decide. Again, the issue is not the individual examples, it’s what the new standard is becoming

I thought to bring up another idea as we work our way through this thread. One of the ordinances of the Church is the consecration of oil. This is a sacred and holy ordinance that makes the consecrated oil unique. Consecrated oil should not be used for cooking or other non sacred things. Consecration means that the oil is blessed and dedicated to sacred use of religious (divine) nature. Money paid in tithing and offerings is given the term "Consecrated Monies" within the Church. This is one of the reasons that someone cannot pay tithing on gambling or lottery winnings - Such ways of acquiring money is contrary to the divine order of such things or behaviors of a Saint. Certain "earnings" cannot be consecrated. This means that money donated to the Church becomes sacred in the same way of thinking that consecrated oil is sacred. This means that the money received should be earned and donated according to sacred covenant. Likewise those that receive, use and otherwise handle consecrated money - should do so according to covenant. I contend that this is the spirit and the letter of the law and that all involved are bound by covenant. We may call it the law of tithing. fast offering, missionary fund or whatever but in essence all such things are included in the Law of Consecration. The Traveler

Here is what you are referencing https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/broadcasts/face-to-face/oaks-ballard?lang=eng Again, this was a specific case where it was wise. They were too poor to even get married and the. He “went off to school” while she stayed to finish hers. It isn’t being taught that this should be the standard, but rather this is a response to a question about trying to balance getting an education and starting a family. HOWEVER... The most important part here is that she got her degree before having a family. It is said nowhere that women should not be educated. What is taught is that it’s the mothers duty to nurture the family and it is the fathers duty to provide. A mother who has the option to either raise her kids or work for financial comfort and let a day care raise their kids (by standard) should choose to raise her kids full time. The standard of living is sky rocketing. A three bedroom house you say?? Most of us grew up sharing their room with their siblings. At one point it was me and 2 siblings being raised in a 2 bedroom house. What you are suggesting is waiting to be comfortable before raising kids. Its been done for generations and it can be done today. I’m doing it right now actually and my wife and I are doing it on purpose. We are in a great financial situation. We have a 3 bed home and About to have 3 kids. We are choosing to put 3 kids in one room and save the 3rd room as a play room. Having 3 kids on one room is not a sacrifice. My sister in law has 4 in 1 room despite there being a whole different room available in the home. I don’t even have to go back to pioneer times to prove people can raise a family with little money. Go back one generation and you will see countless examples of families having 1 car and raising 3-5 kids on a two bedroom home. And to drive this home one last time. This is the STANDARD. Not the law. There are plenty of cases where this is not wise and individuals can make the standard decision. My complaint is that it is being taught and believed that everyone should be waiting for an education and a job before starting a family.

You're more or less demonstrating my point. It's pretty hard to make an argument against the interpretation of equal partners not being the same as equal responsibilities. It's also hard to make an argument against equal partners and equal responsibilities. It really depends on how you feel about the transitive property, on which the Family Proclamation is pretty silent. And I find your comment about "problem causer vs problem solver" to be rather amusing. I mean, the entirety of our standard works create more problems then they answer. It's one of the strongest similarities the Family Proclamation has to scripture. And just as there are people that will fixate one one phrase to justify a woman working out of the home, there are others that will hyper focus on the mother's primary responsibility to the detriment of their family. I am personally familiar with a family where the husband, unable to hold a job and at times physically unable to work refused to let his wife get a job because "if we follow the counsel of the prophets, we will be blessed." Without going into the details, you'll just have to take my word for it that it was tantamount to spiritual abuse. The abuses of these things go in all sorts of directions.

We watched Crash Into You (sorry, can't check the title from work)--a good portion of it is set in a supposed North Korea, and is said to be fairly accurate. It's comedic, has a love story, and some interesting social commentary. Now I'm watching Memories of Alhemadra (again with title check). It's got some sci fi, but took me a couple episodes to get into. IMHO, K-Drama dominates the Asian drama category. In fact, I believe Netflix has it separate.

Quinnipiac Poll, Dec 10, 2020

For me not an issue. Its not a "Thus Saith the Lord," it does seem to be the most likely case. And Leaders are entitled to there own opinions. None of that bothers me, I'm bothered by those who think Trump is doing something fundamentally wrong with his challenges

Like or hate it, the above ^^^ statement still exists. Like it or hate it, the statement "In these sacred responsibilities, fathers and mothers are obligated to help one another as equal partners." still exists. Like it or hate it, the Family Proclamation is quite ambiguous and doesn't answer nearly as many questions as it creates, and is open to a wide array of interpretations. I tend to agree with @JaneDoe, and let families and individuals strive to make decisions that best suit their own and their families' needs.

Indeed. As it is written, I feel there is still plenty of wiggle room for the needs of individual families. But it's another thing entirely to insist, however backhandedly, women must be in the workforce.

Until "The Family A Proclamation to the World" Version 2.0 comes out, I suppose individuals will continue to justify to themselves why they 'chose' to ignore the counsel given by the Prophets. It clearing differentiates between necessity and choice. We don't simply negate the counsel of the Lord because it was given long ago, or in the 1950s or 1995. Unless it has been officially replaced, then it is the current standard and ideal expectation given to us. Like or hate it, the above ^^^ statement still exists.

There was a certain town not too far from me that was infamous for a certain cop and his speed traps. Not so long ago I believe he was fired or something for drinking on the job...

I'm in the position where I am working full-time from home. It's pretty cool. I, like @Suzie, enjoy using my education and training. However, I do have some issue with what I'm seeing as almost some sort of prosperity gospel. I recently chatted with a woman who would love to be a stay-at-home mom. She has a professional job that makes quite a lot of money, and her husband makes well into six figures. However, they have so much lifestyle debt they honestly can't afford for her to quit. On another note, I've often wondered what the desire to be a stay-at-home mom has cost some families. Don't get me wrong, I really will argue the stay-at-home mom thing as a worthy ideal for many, but I've seen many women (probably men as well) who want to "have it all". They want to be the pious and maternal stay-at-home mom, but they also want the fancy lifestyle. This leads to what I view as gold-digging. I'm not saying a woman must marry a jobless lazy bones who still lives in his parents' basement and can't hold down a pizza delivery gig or basic adulting, but I a seeing women panicking a bit too much over their husband's income. Living comfortably but fairly modestly is no longer acceptable. I'm actually seeing women discussing hefty price tags of income attached to potential husbands. It's not just "find a husband who will support your desire to be a stay-at-home mom while providing for the needs of the family". It's "find a husband who will support your desire to be a stay-at-home mom while making sure you live in the best neighborhood and have multiple annual vacations and this and that". I actually have heard of women crying that their home doesn't "look like they're being blessed". There's some prosperity gospel right there for you. I know I am now going off on a tangent, but it may be part of a bigger problem. I love a good comment section, but I see people in the church boasting about how hard they work and how well they provide for their families. Now, keep in mind I do not condemn hard work and even money and lots of it and if your dream career pays extremely well all the better for you and yours, but I do wonder about the growing attitude that "good members of the church make lots of money".

First, Don't confuse saving the Constitution with saving the United States Government. The time of the Gentiles will pass just as every civilization has. Second, I consider this a time for preparation. Food, Shelter and knowledge. Weapons are important to a small degree as well, but remember that the Lord said that "those who live by the sword will die by the sword." Many seem to think they need a lot of firepower to overthrow a tyranny, but what we need is wisdom. To this end, I am collecting books, actual paper books, that have historical, cultural and spiritual importance. I encourage everyone to do the same. I think a time of massive censorship and rewriting of history is at hand. We need to be able to teach the rising generation the truth. Third, we must be mindful of our surroundings. We need to purify ourselves to the point where we can hear and understand the voice of the Spirit. We will need Him more than ever in the coming days.

My, how quickly the Trumplings have gone from “you must overlook Trump’s flaws, because Judges” to “%#$@€ RINO judges!”

Become familiar with it, understand it, and vote and otherwise participate in your community. From the book, "“On Tyranny: Twenty Lessons from the Twentieth Century” by Timothy Snyder I recommend the following principles: 1. Do not obey in advance. Most of the power of authoritarianism is freely given. In times like these, individuals think ahead about what a more repressive government will want, and then offer themselves without being asked. A citizen who adapts in this way is teaching power what it can do. 2. Defend institutions. It is institutions that help us to preserve decency. They need our help as well. Do not speak of “our institutions” unless you make them yours by acting on their behalf. Institutions do not protect themselves. So choose an institution you care about and take its side. 3. Beware the one-party state. The parties that remade states and suppressed rivals were not omnipotent from the start. They exploited a historic moment to make political life impossible for their opponents. So support the multi-party system and defend the rules of democratic elections. 4. Take responsibility for the face of the world. The symbols of today enable the reality of tomorrow. Notice the swastikas and other signs of hate. Do not look away, and do not get used to them. Remove them yourself and set an example for others to do so. 5. Remember professional ethics. When political leaders set a negative example, professional commitments to just practice become important. It is hard to subvert a rule-of-law state without lawyers, or to hold show trials without judges. Authoritarians need obedient civil servants, and concentration camp directors seek businessmen interested in cheap labor. 6. Be wary of paramilitaries. When the men with guns who have always claimed to be against the system start wearing uniforms and marching around with torches and pictures of a Leader, the end is nigh. When the pro-leader paramilitary and the official police and military intermingle, the end has come. 7. Be reflective if you must be armed. If you carry a weapon in public service, God bless you and keep you. But know that evils of the past involved policemen and soldiers finding themselves, one day, doing irregular things. Be ready to say no. 8. Stand out. Someone has to. It is easy to follow along. It can feel strange to do or say something different. But without that unease, there is no freedom. Remember Rosa Parks. The moment you set an example, the spell of the status quo is broken, and others will follow. 9. Be kind to our language. Avoid pronouncing the phrases everyone else does. Think up your own way of speaking, even if only to convey that thing you think everyone is saying. Make an effort to separate yourself from the internet. Read books. 10. Believe in truth. To abandon facts is to abandon freedom. If nothing is true, then no one can criticize power because there is no basis upon which to do so. If nothing is true, then all is spectacle. The biggest wallet pays for the most blinding lights. 11. Investigate. Figure things out for yourself. Spend more time with long articles. Subsidize investigative journalism by subscribing to print media. Realize that some of what is on the internet is there to harm you. Learn about sites that investigate propaganda campaigns (some of which come from abroad). Take responsibility for what you communicate to others. 12. Make eye contact and small talk. This is not just polite. It is part of being a citizen and a responsible member of society. It is also a way to stay in touch with your surroundings, break down social barriers, and understand whom you should and should not trust. If we enter a culture of denunciation, you will want to know the psychological landscape of your daily life. 13. Practice corporeal politics. Power wants your body softening in your chair and your emotions dissipating on the screen. Get outside. Put your body in unfamiliar places with unfamiliar people. Make new friends and march with them. 14. Establish a private life. Nastier rulers will use what they know about you to push you around. Scrub your computer of malware. Remember that email is skywriting. Consider using alternative forms of the Internet, or simply using it less. Have personal exchanges in person. For the same reason, resolve any legal trouble. 15. Contribute to good causes. Be active in organizations, political or not, that express your own view of life. Pick a charity or two and set up autopay. 16. Learn from peers in other countries. Keep up your friendships abroad, or make new friends abroad. The present difficulties in the United States are an element of a larger trend. And no country is going to find a solution by itself. Make sure you and your family have passports. 17. Listen for dangerous words. Be alert to the use of the words extremism and terrorism. Be alive to the fatal notions of emergency and exception. Be angry about the treacherous use of patriotic vocabulary. 18. Be calm when the unthinkable arrives. Modern tyranny is terror management. When the terrorist attack comes, remember that authoritarians exploit such events in order to consolidate power. Do not fall for it. 19. Be a patriot. Set a good example of what America means for the generations to come. 20. Be as courageous as you can. If none of us is prepared to die for freedom, then all of us will die under tyranny. SOme may not like some of the author's examples, but in general I find thee to be very sound principles.

I will buy a gun...nay, I will buy two guns!

A couple of points to ponder: —Brigham Young tried to remove the Saints from the jurisdiction of the US government entirely—hence, the move to Utah. So clearly he believed it possible to be loyal to US constitutional principles while rejecting the rule of the institutional US government. —Let’s not forget that when the Civil War actually happened, the Saints didn’t go rushing out of their mountain homes to preserve the Union. Young’s response was essentially, “pass the popcorn”. —The jurisdiction of the US government in Joseph Smith’s day did not include any of the lands that would become part of the Mexican Cession, and only a tenuous (and disputed) claim on the Oregon territory. If you want to take a strict interpretation of Joseph Smith’s (alleged) words, then you also have to conclude that the modern Saints on the Pacific coast, as well as in Nevada, Utah, Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado, and parts of various other states, have no more obligation to “save” the government in Washington than do the Saints living in Paris or Manila or Mexico City. The Washington government has been forcing us to tolerate baby murder for nearly fifty years. In some significant moral respects, they are just as bad as Hitler. We need not go out of our way to rebel against them—but neither do we need to risk our necks to prop them up once it becomes patently obvious that dissolution is impending. The Saints of God have bigger fish to fry.

First you need to stop conflating the Constitution with the US government... While they are linked they are not the same thing. The Constitution is a piece a paper with the outlines of a form of government written on it. The most literal interpretation of the Prophecy in question, puts us in the plot of the movie National Treasure, with the Elders playing the role of Nicolas Cage. I do not think anyone takes it that literal where we have to preserve the physical document. The next most literal interpretation is preserving the ideas and using it. The United States does this (Or in theory it does anyways). But the United States is not the Constitution it is simply an implementation of it. Governments require the consent of the Governed (Or massive overwhelming might). It seems that in the country less and less people are willing to be ruled as Outlined in the Constitution. But rather be ruled by their own sense of outrage. This will lead to the destruction of the USA if left unchecked. There is no prophecy the the Elders of the Church will save the US Goverment (Though many falsely assume otherwise). Luckily one can save the Constitution from the destruction of the US Goverment. by simply choosing to create and live in a group abiding by its principles. Now you could think that the Elders of the Church will save both the Constitution and the Goverment. That is your right but then you are adding to the prophecy your assumption and not something explicitly stated. That means you would need to explain your addition and why it is in harmony

Despite how wonderful and inspired it is, the US Constitution is the means to an end, not the end itself. The ultimate end goal of mortality is to be exalted in the Celestial Kingdom. Our ultimate priesthood duty is to get everyone else there, too. The Jaredites fell to wickedness. The Nephites and Lamanites fell to wickedness. Likewise, most of us are familiar with Moroni’s warning of secret combinations. But another warning that he offers is: Ether 2:9 And now, we can behold the decrees of God concerning this land, that it is a land of promise; and whatsoever nation shall possess it shall serve God, or they shall be swept off when the fulness of his wrath shall come upon them. And the fulness of his wrath cometh upon them when they are ripened in iniquity. 10 For behold, this is a land which is choice above all other lands; wherefore he that doth possess it shall serve God or shall be swept off; for it is the everlasting decree of God. And it is not until the fulness of iniquity among the children of the land, that they are swept off. 11 And this cometh unto you, O ye Gentiles, that ye may know the decrees of God—that ye may repent, and not continue in your iniquities until the fulness come, that ye may not bring down the fulness of the wrath of God upon you as the inhabitants of the land have hitherto done. 12 Behold, this is a choice land, and whatsoever nation shall possess it shall be free from bondage, and from captivity, and from all other nations under heaven, if they will but serve the God of the land, who is Jesus Christ, who hath been manifested by the things which we have written. So, if you are asking what can be done to save our people and our liberty in this country, my answer is that we trust in God and keep His commandments. Likewise, we encourage everyone else to trust in God and keep His commandments. The further we stray from Him, the closer we are to being swept off. If we trust Him and keep His commandments, the promise is that we will prosper in the land.

I had an enjoyable panel job interview today. When the principal prayed at the beginning so that all would have discernment, I truly sensed God's presence and anointing. So, yeah--great day.

See if I defend you again. You are on your own now bucko.

Or throw it back in my face.

@mirkwood will take those off your hands.

Hi, you must be new here. I’m Just_A_Guy.

I don't know that he's "fundamentally wrong." However, he's being a sore loser, unpresidential, stirring up unnecessary anger and conspiracy theories, and very much putting himself before all else. He's not being illegal, nor going against any official rules. He is being classless. Put simply, he's not ending well. I'm not angry at Trump. He did far better for Christians than we expected. I just find this last chapter disappointing.