Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 09/17/22 in Posts

  1. I go under the knife this week. I will lose a portion of my GI tract, get a temporary ileostomy (small intestine exits the abdomen into a bag 🤢 ), then wait several weeks until he can put my GI tract all back together. As well as the cancer responded to preliminary treatments, we're all optimistic that I should be done with cancer after this.
    6 points
  2. If we celebrate the birthday of a child conceived through an adulterous act, are we celebrating adultery? Your rhetoric here suggests that your answer would be “yes”. If your answer would be “no”, kindly explain yourself. As for the Latter-day Saint position re the Fall: Yes, we celebrate the fact that they ultimately partook of the fruit and that humankind gained both knowledge of good and evil and a necessary mortal state. We do not celebrate the circumstances under which that act was done (ie, the fact that it was an act of disobedience), because, as Elder Smith clearly states, it did constitute a transgression. We also note, as Paul did, that while Eve was deceived, Adam was not (1 Tim 2:14). There is a significant difference between celebrating the incidental positive benefits of a wrongful decision (and God’s ability to turn all things to the benefit of those who love Him), versus celebrating the wrongfulness of the decision itself. This has been explained to you on multiple occasions, and yet you seem to keep trying to strawman us into the latter position.
    4 points
  3. A post surgery thought. After removing the affected portion of my gut, they examined it under a microscope and found residual cancer cells invisible to the MRI. So, in hindsight, the choice to proceed with surgery was the right one. I've gotten fairly sensitized to the observation that God doesn't always intervene (for the better) in everyone's lives, so I'm a little uncomfortable enthusiastically attributing my good fortune to God. At the same time, I recall the point of making the decision to proceed when the thought came seemingly unbidden that, after everything we had done and suffered so far to have the best chance of full cure, it would seem unwise to take on additional risk after trying so hard to minimize the risk. In hindsight, that thought seems almost prophetic. My own story isn't complete, so it's too soon to make final declarations. And I'm still very much aware that not everyone experiences these little miracles, and I have no explanation for why. But I am grateful today for a very small thing that makes me feel more confident in my future.
    3 points
  4. Jane_Doe

    BYU vs. Oregon

    From what I saw (I could be wrong) the school and even the Oregon governor came out with clear condemnation for the fans behavior- flat out calling it “religious bigotry” (which it is). While of course that doesn’t excuse the fans that did the actions, it is nice to actually hear the leaders take a stand condemning it.
    2 points
  5. mirkwood

    BYU vs. Oregon

    Every school has its bad fans. They should be dealt with accordingly and the rest of the fanbase not castigated for the bad ones.
    2 points
  6. Backroads

    BYU vs. Oregon

    I don't know if I'm disappointed by the fans as a whole and thought the apology was right and good. But the article I saw said someone reached out to an Oregon alumni who said it should be overlooked because the problematic fans were freshman. That does leave me wonder what they generally think.
    2 points
  7. I found an interesting linguistic quirk in verse 39. The Greek word for "love" is "universal/godly love". But there is also a word for "righteous self-love" (GR: storge). It is interesting that the word "love" does not accompany the word "thyself". It is merely implied. Storge is the Greek word that says it is ok to take care of yourself. It recognizes that if you neglect your self-care, then you will be in no condition to take care of others. So, in this light, it seems that the idea of "Charity" is external, while "Storge" is internal. But they are basically opposite sides of the same coin. Take care of yourself, so that you are in a good position to take care of others. This is Godly love.
    2 points
  8. I agree. It is esoteric doctrine to the extreme. It does no good to base your salvation on esoteric doctrine. Although, it's fun to consider the possibilities... Personally, I will base my salvation on core or eternal doctrine like Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ and repentance.
    2 points
  9. The problem with some who homeschool is the same as the problem with some who use public schools, which is the same as the problem with every human being: Taking responsibility. To take responsibility for your children's education does not mean simply disenrolling them from public school. That may be a first step, but there are ten thousand more steps after that. People want to check something off their checklist and have it done with. For many things, that works. For educating your child, it does not. Homeschooling is not a discrete activity. Homeschooling is best described as a lifestyle. Life itself becomes the school. Topics are not taught individually, divorced from their application in life; rather, the child is introduced to life's tasks and wonders in the context of the skills being taught, e.g. math. There are those who listen to people (like me, perhaps) who decry the state of public education and suggest that homeschooling might be the best possible alternative. Those people, in a fit of pique, might then pull their children from the public schools. This in itself is not bad, and could be the first step to something good. But again, steps 2 through 10,001 must be taken, or the children are little better off than they were, and in at least some cases are actually worse off. Homeschooling is not an event. Homeschooling is a lifestyle choice. You don't have to be perfect at it, just as you don't have to be perfect at any life choice you make, at least to begin with. You simply need to be dedicated to the tasks before you and humble enough to see when you're wrong or don't know what you're doing and get help. In my view, what we call "homeschooling" is really just family and friends taking care of each other, the way God intended us to live. If you give honest effort, you will very probably be okay and your children will benefit greatly from your sacrifices. If you think you can simply hand the kids a book and the TV remote, your children will get few if any benefits from your efforts. I'm an advocate and perhaps an evangelist for homeschooling. But implicit in that advocacy is the idea that you actually homeschool your children.
    2 points
  10. NeuroTypical

    Fetal Hearbeat

    First priority: I should be able to clip my fingernails and have moles and warts and tumors and parasites removed. Bodily autonomy is a core foundation of liberty and freedom. Also First priority: Human beings, especially the weak and defenseless ones, must be protected by society and law. Humans get equal protection under the law - also a core foundation of liberty and freedom. So when does the reproductive cycle create a human, deserving of equal protection under the law? Pretty much nobody advocates extending the status of personhood to a sperm, or an egg. Few believe a fertilized egg or multicelled blastocyst is a human. As the thing grows and matures, more and more people cross the "okay it's a person now" line. Every stage crossed, brings more and more into the "it's a person" camp: A beating heart, the ability to feel pain, brain activity, indications of having a sleep pattern, reactions that indicate familiarity to certain sounds. By the time of viability (the ability to survive outside the womb), pretty much everyone has joined the camp. You can find some, here and there, who believe a woman should have a right to abort her born and independently living child, but probably in similar numbers as those who believe spilling seed is mass murder. There should be room for exceptions, like the 14 year old who escapes from her evil father, in the 3rd trimester carrying his child, a child that will not survive for long and will likely kill the mother during birth. God drops hints that can be interpreted in various ways. He doesn't settle the matter for us. The church does what it always does in the lack of clear and unambiguous revelation - it's best. In such a situation, it makes sense to let the states (or the people), make up their own minds. Folks of similar views can go live amongst others of similar stripes, if it's that important to them. So let Cali and Colorado be on the late end of things, and let Georgia and Mississippi be on the early end of things, and everyone else can argue about weeks, and yell in all caps, and crowbar as much emotion or reason into their arguments as they wish. And they can vote in their states, and the strongest voices will win in that state. And folks can argue about jumping states for abortions. That's better than the federal government telling everyone what to do.
    1 point
  11. Carborendum

    Fetal Hearbeat

    With the Dobbs decision has come many state abortion laws with varying standards. One common standard is the fetal heartbeat. As soon as the heartbeat is detected, then abortion either becomes illegal or subject to severe restrictions. <Disclaimer> My personal position does not support legislating abortion bans at 6 weeks. My complaint with the latest news is the run-around pro-abortionists are attempting by changing definitions to fit their narrative. In response to the fetal heartbeat laws, the pro-abortionists are now altering their definition of heartbeat. First Stacy Abrams made a poor attempt at this What she said, as phrased is simply incorrect and illogical. But she was referring to a condition that more informed individuals decided to word correctly. Planned Parenthood has changed the wording on their website. At least livescience had the integrity to clearly state that their article had been altered since the Dobbs decision. https://www.livescience.com/65501-fetal-heartbeat-at-6-weeks-explained.html And this website still shows the "accepted science" just a few weeks ago. The shift in the narrative all started several weeks ago when various health sites brought up the issue. Gee, where have I heard the "cluster of cells" argument before? If everything is just a cluster of cells, nothing is just a cluster of cells. They're basically taking the partial birth abortion argument and downgrading it to the fetal heartbeat condition. I guess, this is a sign of a win for pro-lifers. They're so desperate that they're running mental gymnastics to try to push their agenda. We'll see how this holds up in court. But one thing that the Dobbs decision did was make this a state matter. So, the Supreme Court will push any attempt at a national standard back to the states. Planned Parenthood will have to take this to court separately in each state that has such a ban. And each state will have their own modifications to the fetal heartbeat laws because of such decisions.
    1 point
  12. I've spent some more time thinking about this. And I'd like to add some things to the conversation. Many people in the Church believe that everything Joseph wrote in what we have today as the JST is a full and complete "correction". Well, they are wrong on two accounts. He never actually completed all of his markups. He was martyred before that was done. While he restored much that was lost (e.g. Matt 24) many of his markups were simply commentary & clarifications. They weren't meant to be "corrections" at all. There is a very famous volume known as the "Matthew Henry Commentary". It is considered the hallmark of Biblical commentaries throughout Christianity today. It appears that many of the comments and clarifications that Joseph wrote were nearly word-for-word copies of some of M.H.'s commentary. Some items, it seems, were not KJV mistranslations, but because Joseph was commenting that FOR OUR DAY, the scriptures would be worded a bit differently. 1 Tim 2 is a controversial chapter because it tells women to shut up and do what their husbands tell them to do. (Eph 5:22 also is one that the woke crowd uses to justify the claim that the Bible was clearly written by bigoted men. Forget about verse 21 or 25, that will ruin their narrative.) I took a closer look at 1 Tim 2:15 in various translations. Some translations will justify this connection of "she" (in the first phrase) and "they" (in the second phrase) by using "women" in place of "she". But the Greek clearly does not say that. The Greek texts clearly show a third person singular inflection for "she" and third person plural for "they". So, what are we to make of this? Many Saints will look at the JST and reckon that the version we have is simply a later version that didn't preserve the correct word. I think that is a mistake. I believe that the translation we have in the KJV is correct as it stands. That is probably what Paul wrote. As I stated in my previous post, I believe it was more of a commentary to update it for our dispensation rather than a correction of what our current texts say. There was counsel in that chapter about not wearing flagrant jewelry or hair styles, etc. But as a rule men simply didn't do that back then. It is only in today's society of luxury and opulence do men even have the notion of doing so. They have historically men doing so have been outliers. But since the renaissance? Especially in the last 50 years? Yes, men need to have the same counsel. Let me bring you back to the last phrase of the chapter. "...if THEY shall continue..." It was always about the unity of husband and wife. And if women have a particular problem, it is the prophet's job to shut women down. If men have a particular problem, it is the prophet's job to shut them down. I can't tell you how many Priesthood sessions of General Conference we've had that basically yelled at men to stop practicing unrighteous dominion. I would very often speak with Empress after every general conference to see if I was guilty of any of these behaviors that I'd just been lectured about. Most of the time, no. But there were times when she said yes. And I'd make efforts to correct it. But do we hear much of that being given to women? It is common to believe that we now have split priesthood and "women's" sessions in General Conference because of "wokeness" entering into the Church. I don't think so. I've read the Ensign after conference. And I find it interesting how many times I hear similar "unrighteous dominion" type comments now being given to women. It may be veiled. But it is there. Before, it was more like "stop being so hard on yourselves." Now it is more like, "Women of the Church have a responsibility to..." And sometimes, it isn't all sunshine and roses. So, it if it was really giving in to wokeness, I'd say -- Be careful what you wish for. You may get it.
    1 point
  13. Correct. My point here is that social media doing this was just a baby-step. If push came to shove, we would all easily leave social media. We could find alternatives. But to take away our ability to engage in legal commerce? That's the very definition of the Mark of the Beast.
    1 point
  14. We already see this with Big Tech (Facebook, Twitter, Google, etc...). Facebook, you can only hold any view "Facebook" esteems as right. If not, flagged, suspended, etc... Google, no more talking about the ineffectiveness of mask wearing, and many other things. Even if you are presenting logical facts from research that shows otherwise. Nope, you can't talk, you can't share, we control the narrative of what is right. Facebook in cahoots the FBI that Zuckerberg revealed regarding potential misinformation. Wasn't it the government, Biden's entourage who said they are working privately with Facebook and getting information -- or something to that nature.
    1 point
  15. Carborendum

    Victory Garden

    Given the heat this summer, I thought I'd try an attempt at a second crop of watermelons. But it's not turning out like I'd hoped. This first one shows that my 1.5 month old plant is shorter than the weed that grew up just this week. This other plant, however, seems to be progressing well. I have no idea why most of the growth is on one side only. The three vines to the right have plenty of room. But they are all dwarfed for some reason. The two vines to the left seem full size. You can see the male flower just opening up near the center of the photo Female flowers will not show up for another two weeks. So, the only way I'm getting a crop out of these is if it stays warm all throughout October. That would be rare. But it is a rare summer. According to the Farmer's Almanac, we're getting a hard shift from summer to winter without much of an autumn at all. So, we'll see if I get any more melons this year.
    1 point
  16. I'm glad you're documenting your progress through this thing here, @MrShorty. Good luck, and keep us up to date!
    1 point
  17. I try hard to keep both of those in my heart, mind, and actions. I find the first one is easier than the 2nd. I've long thought that inherent in the 2nd, is a rather hidden commandment that we've got to love ourselves too. That's got to be part of the deal, because there are no shortage of people who hate themselves, and the 2nd great commandment is not a free pass to do harm to folks.
    1 point
  18. It is easy to think of this as a "correction." I don't believe it to be meant that way. It is translated correctly as it is. But Joseph was trying to make an overall doctrinal point for OUR day. The chapter has a specific purpose: To remind women to be more "peaceful" or "tranquil" (this is an alternate translation of "silent" found in verses 11 & 12). And they were counseled to be more modest in their dress and grooming. In other words, don't be a hen-pecking over-bearing wife who always has to be the prettiest "specimen" at social gatherings. So, Paul's words were specifically addressing women and their roles & responsibilities in marriage. This is not to say men can do this and women cannot. It appears that at the time of the epistle, there was a problem in that particular area of women being overbearing to their husbands. (Gee that doesn't sound familiar at all). And there are plenty of other scriptures that urge men to be more kind and loving to their wives: So, why this commentary/correction? It is really about the context of the era. While the epistle was specifically addressing a problem for women of that area & era, the counsel in verse 15 (and, really the entire chapter) does actually apply to men and women equally. Look at verse 14. It indicates that Adam did nothing wrong. Well, I don't necessarily agree. I believe it was mainly a point of what to focus on to make the point. For Eve, it was because she was deceived (or so goes the common wisdom). But for Adam, he had to do what he had to do. But it was still transgression for him as well. For both, it had to be done because (among other things) they were commanded to have seed. So, if they continue to have seed abiding in "Faith, love, holiness, and modesty" then they will be forgiven of their transgression. BTW, the "love" and "modesty" are the literal translations of those words from the Greek. "Charity" we know to be "love". But "sobriety" isn't quite what we think of as "modesty." Another translation is "self-control." So, Joseph's commentary is to point out that Adam also fell. It wasn't just Eve. They both could find salvation in child-bearing and child-rearing. But specifically, they are reminded about the conditions of the Law of Chastity. Remember, Joseph was not the prophet of the early Church. He is the prophet of OUR dispensation. So, any corrections/commentaries/modifications must be seen in that light. This was not a question of it being "translated correctly" (as far as linguistics). It is a question of "if it were written today, how would we APPLY the same doctrine being taught?"
    1 point
  19. Check your FB inbox.
    1 point
  20. https://www.tshaonline.org/handbook/entries/mormons Almost forgot about the entry in the Handbook of Texas, a resource maintained by the Texas State Historical Association.
    1 point
  21. mikbone

    Mercy

    We know that everyone who comes to earth will be resurrected. Some may feel that that is an unconditional arrangement. That is incorrect. We fought in the pre-mortal existence for this opportunity. And becaused we fought and prevailed with Jehovah, we conditionally recievied the opportunity to come to Earth, be born, tested, die, and resurrected. Where we go after the resurrection is conditional upon our performance of said test.
    1 point
  22. I find it amusing that the very first quote states that there is no official declaration either way, but then it proceeds to provide all the quotes on one side only. Yes, that was the title of the page. But to what end? And all pages like this always include the following quote as if it supports the idea (which it does not): This is explicitly stating that this is NOT a sound doctrine, and he only supposes that exceptions may exist. But as a rule, it is not provided for. * I always accept and admit that there has been no official declaration of the doctrine of progression between kingdoms. But this seems to be a binary answer. As such, I see the following: If false, let's not continue saying it could be the case, lest people get the wrong idea. If true, it is still a dangerous doctrine to be spreading. The doctrine of the Three Degrees was withheld from mankind prior to the Resurrection for a reason. Man was not ready for it. As it is, if this "open kingdoms" (to coin a phrase) doctrine is true, is man ready for it? It is all too easy to interpret this as: I cannot come to any logical thought that would conclude that teaching the doctrine of progression between kingdoms will result in anything other than this mentality. Even it if is true, what good can come of teaching it with the state of man today? Alma warns us about this very mindset. Whatever that "exception" may be (if there is one or a few) it should be obvious that there is a very strong tendency (and possibly, inevitability) to maintain our current attitudes towards obedience and faith (we can call it a "mindset") after we leave this life. And it is that "mindset" that will determine just how far we can go. If complete progress is truly open for all, then that means there really is no separation at all. So this doctrine of the three degrees is meaningless. I would think that if the doctrine of "open kingdoms" is true at all, it would be only in the rarest of circumstances (as Pres. Smith said in the quote above). If the kingdoms truly are open, then what does the doctrine of the three degrees even mean?
    1 point
  23. laronius

    Mercy

    If we are talking about granting mercy as purely a means for avoiding the demands of justice then mercy without conditions is the most merciful. We see this enacted on behalf of those who live without the law, such as little children. But if we are talking about mercy as a tool for progression then conditions are necessary otherwise there is no progress and the mercy has not fulfilled it's purpose.
    1 point
  24. LDSGator

    For Mirkwood

    Where did you get that picture?! Those are private!!!!
    1 point
  25. 1. Different church authorities have gone in different directions on this. But it really doesn’t matter to us, because the fall narrative primarily explains the fallen state of man—our own struggles with death and illness, our own spiritual natures and wrestle with sin, our own alienation from and desire for reconciliation with God. 2. At this point, I really couldn’t give three craps about what you say about other churches’ beliefs. I have no reason to believe you are representing their beliefs with any more understanding, accuracy, or honesty than you’ve represented our own. Other belief systems will ultimately stand approved of God (or not) on their own merits. But as for our beliefs: It is not Adam’s and Eve’s disobedience that Latter-day Saints celebrate. As I said to you nearly two months ago: The most handy modern-life analogue I can think of is a couple who breaks the law of chastity and, on learning that the woman has become pregnant, marry and keep the child; over the years finding joy and rejoicing in their child and in parenthood generally. The Lord turned a bad decision into something that served His purpose and, in His mercy, offered forgiveness and redemption to the sinners. But His mercy does not mean that the sin was not sin or that, were the sinners given the chance to go back in time to repeat or avoid their sin, they would not be expected to chose a more directly-righteous course. Adam and Eve repented of their sins. You seem to be doubling down on yours; and I would advise you to stop.
    1 point
  26. Carborendum

    Non LDS GF

    Marriage is always fraught with built-in conflicts. If you and your wife are both reasonable people, you can usually work things out. When it becomes difficult is when there are "core issues" at conflict. What is a core issue for you or her may be very different than core issues for anyone else. If you're going to be serious about a religion, you're saying that a specific way of life is going to be part of your "core". This creates exponentially strained relations when you start having children and have to make decisions on what rules they need to follow as you raise them. The teachings of the Church are designed to make your relationship with The Lord a core part of who you are. Many seemingly mundane activities will have some reminder of our relationship with God. You've indicated that you have learned about our health code (the Word of Wisdom, or WoW for short). But if you ONLY see it as our health code, you've only got part of the story. When I go to a restaurant and I see the list of drinks, I see that there is a section for alcoholic drinks and a section for non-alcoholic drinks. As I see that alcoholic section, I skip over it with a reminder that I've made covenants to my Heavenly Father to refrain from those drinks. It is a reminder that I've chosen a path that is special. And there are several other parts of our religion that are just as integrated into our behavior. Being a Latter-day Saint is not just a few hours on Sunday. It is who we are. And it isn't just about a "social etiquette". It is about developing a relationship with our Savior through constant reminders throughout our lives that we are not simply "crude matter" (as Yoda put it). We are spiritual beings with a higher purpose. It is through constant reminders that we can develop our relationship with Deity and become what we are meant to become. All human beings have this potential because we've all been given a spark of Divinity within us. But we are so inundated with sensory inputs from this mortal world that we forget our divine nature. All these new behaviors you will learn about are about reminding us about our divine nature. If you choose to get married, are you and your wife going to be on the same page about what/who you are? While it is possible (I know some who have made it work) the great majority of the time it becomes too much to strain such a marriage. I once heard a statistic of 1 out of 20 are successful. You need three things in common (technically 4) if your marriage is supposed to work. You need to have a common place of beginning. One reason we have elaborate wedding ceremonies is to provide that on some level. You need to have a common set of values. Becoming LDS has a lot more "value based" demands than you may be currently aware of. You need a common vision for the future. Other faiths + LDS faith marriage have a better chance of working if you're willing to give up the Celestial Kingdom. Completely different faiths + LDS faith... I don't know if I've ever heard of these working out. And if she's atheist... Additionally, what about your children? How will you raise them? (Obvious appendage): You need to be committed to those common values and common vision for the future. A core part of our faith is family. And this implies Temple marriage (sealing) and a hope that all our children will have a Temple marriage. If you marry her at this point, are you willing to give those up? Currently, you may be willing. But if joining this faith is your goal, you'll eventually learn why it is so important. And you'll regret the fact that you've essentially given that up. As with anything this monumental, it is your choice. But at some point you'll realize that something's gotta give. While the very few are able to find a third way, most of the time you're left figuring out what are you willing to give up to gain the other?
    1 point
  27. If you're interested in kids, something to ponder: If you cannot both agree before marriage on what core truths and beliefs will be taught, expect to see those differences waging war in your children as they grow. You will find reason to mourn such division and lost paths. For each kid, at least one parent will "lose". Possibly both parents, but no fewer than one. Can it still be worth it? Dunno. Folks who have told me stories tell a mixed bag of them. From what I've personally heard, divorce or dead marriages are more common than happy-ever-after stories. But both exist.
    1 point
  28. Vort

    Non LDS GF

    NMN, here's a relevant blog post from one of a handful of LDS bloggers that I truly admire (though I don't always agree with Sister Parshall or her approach to topics; I guess you could say I'm something of a Parshall fan). She expounds using the same Eliza R. Snow poem I quoted above: http://www.keepapitchinin.org/2014/03/04/when-you-gather-to-zion/ The blog post itself and the comments that follow ring true to me, though they have a somewhat more negative tone than I would portray. As I wrote earlier, I love Utah. It's a sacred place for me. But if you go there, go in with your eyes open. There are good people in great abundance, but not only good people. There are folks of all stripes. It's worth noting that Salt Lake City is a center, perhaps the center, of antiMormon activity.
    1 point
  29. Vort

    Non LDS GF

    FTR, Eliza R. Snow was a sister to Lorenzo Snow, the fifth president of the Restored Church of Christ and a contemporary of Joseph Smith. She was a gifted poet and quite a spiritual person, sometimes unofficially referred to as "the prophetess". She wrote several hymns, at least two of which are in our current hymnal: "How Great the Wisdom and the Love" and "O My Father". The above poem, "Think Not, When You Gather to Zion", is also written as a hymn. It was in our hymnals when I was growing up, but apparently the 1985 (current) hymnal doesn't have it. Pity.
    1 point
  30. Vort

    Non LDS GF

    My opinions only, obviously. How long? Now is a good time to be looking toward raising a family. Everything you do (like, literally, every decision you make) should be with that end in mind. As for your girlfriend, personal compatibility between spouses is tremendously important to a good marriage. But it's not the only thing, and not even the most important. Shared values are the bedrock of any intimate relationship, with marriage being the prime example. It sounds like you're a Latter-day Saint. If a girl you're dating, however wonderful, is truly "100% against Christianity", to my mindset that's an obvious dealbreaker. Please note that I am not urging you to leave the relationship. Rather, I'm trying to provide honest and pointed feedback. You cannot and will not change her mind or attitude. Only she and the Spirit of God can do that. If the nature of your relationship with this young woman is sexual, then to be blunt, you are living after the manner of the world. There is no lasting happiness in such an arrangement. You really need to get that sorted out before you will significantly progress in the spiritual journey you want to take. As for Utah, it is a beautiful place, both in nature and in society. I think it's a special place (no sarcasm intended). It certainly was and is for me. But ultimately, it's just a place, and its inhabitants, however friendly, are just people. Do as you feel you are led to do, but don't imagine that going to Utah is like going to heaven. Saints raised in Utah tend to call it "Zion" and everywhere else "the mission field." Eliza R. Snow's urging might have some applicability here: Think not, when you gather to Zion, your troubles and trials are through, That nothing but comfort and pleasure are waiting in Zion for you. No, no, 'tis designed as a furnace, all substance, all textures to try, To burn all the "wood, hay, and stubble," the gold from the dross purify. Think not, when you gather to Zion, that all will be holy and pure; That fraud and deception are banished, and confidence wholly secure. No, no, for the Lord our Redeemer has said that the tares with the wheat Must grow till the great day of burning shall render the harvest complete. Think not, when you gather to Zion, the saints here have nothing to do But to look to your personal welfare, and always be comforting you. No, those who are faithful are doing what they find to do with their might; To gather the scattered of Israel they labor by day and by night. Think not, when you gather to Zion, the prize and the victory won. Think not that the warfare is ended, the work of salvation is done. No, no, for the great prince of darkness a tenfold exertion will make, When he sees you go to the fountain, where freely the truth you may take.
    1 point
  31. We've been demolishing healthy roles and norms for a long time now. It is not good for society; and this fact can be judged not only spiritually but rationally. We know (because we've measured) that children raised together by their biological parents, have the best outcomes statistically. Level of schooling, work stability, criminality, are metrics most people can agree on. We know (because we've measured, but I'll stop saying this now) that children spending too much time in daycare tend to have worse outcomes. We know that homosexuals have higher rates of crime and abuse among themselves (not from the outside) We know that homosexuals have a higher propensity for unhealthy and disgusting practices, which have little to do with love, as the monkeypox outbreak has re-highlighted. We know divorce is a crazy pandemic at this time which is a shame given the facts about how healthy relationships bless children. We know that birthrates are crashing around the world including in Utah. However rationally someone may desire a population collapse, they have to know that it will be a problem someday. It's a problem which doesn't go away as soon as a country decides more kids are wanted, as china has proved. Peoples minds and hearts have been polluted with misguided selfishness which doesn't stop when someone says stop. We know that lgbt people have more mental health issues, more substance abuse. We know that trangender people have a truly catastrophic suicide rate which is not mitigated by living in a permissive society. We have strong reason to believe that this suicide was not as common before society became sickened with this mind virus. (I mean that we don't think that these people were quietly committing suicide in the past, under the radar. Instead their embracing of the mind virus is actually causing it)
    1 point
  32. Just_A_Guy

    Fetal Hearbeat

    I have some times mused on how entertaining it would be, as a criminal defense lawyer, to defend a murder suspect using all of the rationalizations and excuses and half-truths and hair-splitting arguments that the elective abortionists use.
    0 points
  33. NeuroTypical

    BYU vs. Oregon

    I haven't been to a BYU basketball game in, well, ever. But do the opposing fans still hold up large banners/posters of girls in bikinis behind the basket, when a BYU player is trying to make free throws? Because that appeared to be all the rage in the '90's (when I last payed attention).
    0 points
  34. LDSGator

    BYU vs. Oregon

    The Oregon fans chanting what they did was classless. Disappointed in them. 😞
    0 points
  35. That's because you never saw my bumper sticker:
    0 points
  36. 0 points
  37. Vort

    BYU vs. Oregon

    At least Mirkwood is happy.
    0 points
  38. mikbone

    BYU vs. Oregon

    ouch
    0 points
  39. Last year, we spent the Thanksgiving week in a house in south Orem, Utah, where we all gathered with our BYU student children to celebrate. The AirBnB we rented was very large, with lots of sleeping space. It was perfect for our needs. As an added bonus, the main floor bathroom was a wonder. I thought I had taken this picture; it only took me ten months to find it. Behold this bathtub, complete with working shower! Fancy, huh?
    0 points
  40. I am with you on this. I ha e heard a few things. Genders were first a thing for doctors because... youay identify as a woman but... if you were born with a prostate then you need prostate exams. honestly being genders spell out medical care and such I personally thing they should change it from what gender were you born to... what hormone do you naturally produce. So on your Birth certificate it should now be E for estrogen or T for testosterone. That way it doesn't matter what you wear or how you dress you get x treatment for each hormone type. Also.... I really don't care if you want to become a potato. But I wonder.... if we truly die and become our most perfected selves. I worry for someone who spent their WHOLE life becoming something else to spend eternity as the person you loathed so much you got plastic surgury or got a sex change. I would think that would be someone's own personal hell.... I wouldn't wish that on my worst enemy.... just saying
    0 points
  41. Pronouns are he/hee.
    0 points