hordak

I think it's a shame. Solders die to protect the freedoms and rights of the US Constitution, which include Free speech and assembly and the towns people dishonor the same freedoms these members died for because they don't like what this church has to say. Families don't have the right to a funeral without interruption. Per the US Supreme Court. interpretation of the US constitution that these service members signed up to protect. Is what they say and do good, true or right? No i don't think so. But it is a greater dishonor to ignore the rights that people put their life on the line for and died for simply because we don't agree with what others say. It kind of reminds me of the anti semites who hate the Jews because "they killed Jesus". They are completely missing the point of the Crusifiction and his life.

Gospel Principles Chapter 47: Exaltation

Actually midiclorians (as per George Lucas )is a microscopic life forms in all matter that the Jedi, and Sith are able to manipulate. This is what allows them to use the force. The "God gene" is thought to be VMAT2,

!st amendment protects the stuff others say, not just the stuff you like. I'm sure i've told this story before but when i was in the service the war protesters were crowded around the gates at the base all the time. My supervise used to come in complaining about them, just gripping all morning long. I loved them. Not because i agreed with what they said, but because they were taking full advantage of the rights i signed up to protect. So while i don't agree with what they say or how they say it, i'm glad they are protected, because it means we all are. Plus this church thrives on publicity, the negative publicity gave a church of 71 members a worldwide voice. I think the best action would be to ignore them.

Never seen september dawn. But will admit liking Flash Gordon in one of my guilty pleasures

Wonder if OPs vies evolved, since it was 4 years ago:p 04-04-2007, 07:25 AM

Total anecdotal evidence here but i heard a story once... Missionaries at MTC were having a Q&A session with one of the 12 and one ask "What does it mean to blasphemy the holy ghost?" the response was "There is only one person in this room who needs to worry about it, and I don't plan on it" Don't know if the story is true or not but it was said by Joseph Smith Seems you must have some great knowledge, to commit it. Didn't Peter deny Christ? If he was there with him, denied him for his own personal benefit, and was still able to pass on the Priesthood (D&C 27) i think someone questioning, millennial later in spite of having a baptism would not committing the unpardonable sin.

You completely missed the point. Problem is you attributing the deeds of a few to an entire group. I have an anti catholic friend who does the same thing in light of some of the recent scandals. Also know some atheist/agnostics who do the same thing dropping name like Steven Hawking, or Richard Dawkins. But you see the acts of a few, don't represent the group as a whole, whether they be good, or bad. You might call that "small minded" I call that logic. Mormon is to Browning as Mormon is to Mark Hoffman. Both got famous doing unusual things. But these thing don't represent the church.

2 wrongs can make a right:evilsmile:

Proclamation on family The Family: A Proclamation to the World

War does not equal patriotism. And John Browning represents "they" as much as Mark Hoffman, Butch Cassidy or Ted Bundy do.

I'm saying from a secular stand point it's hypocritical to accuse those who want to keep marriage between a man and a women, as discriminatory, while being perfectly fine with discriminating against polygamist/ polyandry because it's seen as unnatural.

Why is that closing loophole But to add Is Discrimination:huh: defining marriage between 2 people, because you don't think it's natural to have more is no different then those who define it as man and woman because they see ssm as unnatural

That is ridicules. I can't believe members of the church, who can refuse to marry a couple because one drinks tea, would fear being forced to wed gays in the temple. Naturally the opposition wouldn't bring up the protection in their ads, I'm just suprized so many would actually think churches would be forced to to wed gays, given that religious groups are all ready exempt from changing their doctrine and practices to meet secular law. When native Americans are taking peyote, when LDS an Catholics aren't including women in the priesthood, and when westboro baptist are picketing funerals of service members. I don't think we need to fear being forced into performing SSM.

I would think it would be "built in" automatically. A Catholic church can't be forced to marry a non catholic to Jew (although religion is a protected class) likewise members of the church who don't follow the standards, drink tea, coffee ,not pay tithe, etc. Has no legal right to force the church into performing a wedding.

Sounds to me like your mind is made up and you are looking for support. I'm going contradict what most will say and give you that support. I do not believe in being married for the kids. My wife and have taken a few marriage classes and seminars (an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure) and in every one, one of the main things emphasized is the importance of being Mr and Mrs, and not just mom and dad, which leads to problems in the best of marriage. If you and your husband are "strangers" living in the same home and have no love the kids will pick up on this and personal i see no difference between Mom over here , dad over their, whether in the same home or separate homes. My wife went though something like this as a youth, her mother spent 10 years with in a loveless marriage (on both sides) because he was a good provider, and she thought she was doing what was best for my wife. My wife could tell. My folks on the other hand were married 30 some years, until my mother passed, and it wasn't that they were together in the same house, that gave me something to strive for in my future, but that they were together, emotionally and spiritually.

That's good. The problem with this subject is they sell the sizzle and "lose 10 lbs a week eating what you want" sells better than "work out 3-5 days a week, count your calories for every meal and in 2 and a half months you can lose ten lbs" But if you can separate the bs from stuff that works, then that is good

This is from his 4 hour body book. needless to say if his diet claims are as preposterous i would avoid it like the plague. We were just trashi... discussing that book on a personal training forum

Came in here expecting a discussion on careers .

Do you not believe in Allah of the Koran because you want to eat pork, not pray 5 times a day, not make a pilgrimage to Mecca and be clean shaven. or Do you eat pork, not pray 5 times a day, not make a pilgrimage to Mecca and are clean shaven because you do not believe in Allah in the Koran. Why would it be different for atheist?

It's funny when people think of calling they think they are inspired. But only to actually take on and complete the calling. I know a person who was called to teach. After about 4 months they resigned. Some people saw this as wrong, "the calling was inspired for you to grow, how could you quit" what the missed was the fact the person did grow. They were considering a teaching career, (this showed them it was not the right path) and they had a problem with admitting when something was too much, couldn't let others down. Reviving a calling that was too much, having to quit, and risk disappointing an authority figure, was a greater learning/growing experience for the individual than, doing the calling, because it was expected would have ever been. The calling may have been inspired to help you grow and learn, but that doesn't mean you can only grow by completing it.

Think i'm reading you right. The actions (taken freely) and the sexism cause the problems, not the church's discipline. However i think if people's judgment/ views can be so wrong, even when there is not such a strict discipline,(she wasn't exed) then it would only be harsher when faced with someone who was exed. That is NOT to say the church shouldn't excommunicate people, when warranted, to prevent the negative consequences from the members. But just to point out that there is a certain attitude carried by some members in the church that does lead them to abandon sinners.As illustrated in your example. So with THE church... Excommunication (or sin) ≠ abandonment. unfortunately with some member it does.

Think i'm going to agree with LDSguy on this on given your former example JAG The church might not abandon, but members of the ward are perfect content to, or worse, as you illustrated above.

Just to add teaching them BoM doctrine wouldn't make them Mormon (as in LDS Church headed by Thomas Monson) There are other church who believe in the BoM, i've even heard about a baptist minister who believe in it. Baptist Preacher Believes in Book of Mormon Grace for Grace Doesn't make him/ them LDS

Yep. They wanted $130 ($100 registration, $30 worth of fundraiser ticket to be sold "by the player" ) for my son to play T-Ball twice a week. In kindergarten When i was a kid we played sports for free with the neighborhood kids and actual team play didn't kick in until 10 or 12.