bytor2112

LOL.....have a little faith DS!! I am not quite the Machiavellian figure you probably think I am.

LOL......but, you know, that is the way the Gospel affects people.....it makes them hunger for more! Meeting with missionaries is a really cool experience and these young men and women have been called and set apart to carry the gospel to the world......you won't be disappointed.

My suggestion would be to start with the Missionaries. We all need to crawl before we walk and gaining a testimony.....a belief in basic gospel principals will give you a sure and solid foundation by which to gain further light and truth. Good luck on your journey!

Bytor drinks OJ for breakfast, water during the day, an occasional Diet Dr. Pepper or Coke Zero, Crystal Light and .......I think that is about it.

1. Everything. 2. Favorite Scripture: (subject to change) Nephi II Ch. 31 verse 20 and John Ch 17 Book: Book of Mormon 3. Favorite persons: (besides family:)) Past: Joseph Smith, Bruce R. McConkie, Gordon B. Hinckley and Ezra Taft Benson Present: Thomas Monson, Henry B. Eyring and Jeffrey Holland (favorite speakers) Bishop Gomillion (former Bishop) and President Dame (former SP) Bishop Voyles (current Bishop) Future: umm.......have to consult crystal ball for that one.

Original Series and Wrath of Khan

Star Trek :: Official Site

I think it would be much easier for most people to swallow, if they were to announce that Homosexuals are a different species of human being. They are indeed born to be attracted and live with their own gender. Like gender and race, they are different genetically and thus their apparent gender, be it male or female should be overlooked because it doesn't apply. But that hasn't happened. As far as most people can tell or at least understand....they are just like any other male or female....other than a proclivity toward members of the same gender. They can't procreate with their same gender and they can't continue their bloodline without procreation with a member of the opposite sex. That leaves many people wondering why two men or two women should be allowed to marry, because it seems that the only thing that separates them from most men and women is the desire for emotional and sexual companionship with a member of their same gender. Leaving aside the religious argument against these type of unions, if g/l marriage is legalized, what is next? If gender is not an essential element of marriage or procreation or continuance of one's family bloodline, then where is the line to be drawn and why is their a line at all. I am not trying to be insensitive, I am sure that homosexuals struggle with something that I don't understand and maybe they are "born" that way. But, given the recent vote in California.... a very liberal state........many still seem to feel that is not the case.

What is the context?

If the guilty are prosecuted and punished, then justice is served. Publishing photos will only add fuel to the fire for the extremists. Better to punish the guilty and keep the investigation photos private, than to stir up more violence that may lead to the death of more innocents.

Releasing the photos ONLY tells one side of the story and is fodder for the enemy. You can bet that these pics will be used to drum up terror support and may ultimately cost more Americans their lives. This is a really bad idea. Here is the salient quote from the article.....IMO:

No.....I really do love Colorado.

Not holding a prayer meeting or inviting religious leaders to the White House is one thing, but I think he erred in not sending a delegate.........of course I am sure that was intentional and calculated as most things are with politicians.

I personally don't care either way.........just to be fair, I think Notre Dame should not have made such a stink about the President speaking their......regardless of who is in the office, he is still the President of the United States.

Obama didn't send a delegation either....which is the first time since 1993.

Thanks for your interest.......I am sure their is a hint of sarcasm their DS.

Most of my threads are about politics...at least on the current event side. As it relates to politics and seems interesting, I post it. That being said, I am personally opposed to G/L marriage and think the behavior shouldn't be encouraged or sanctioned by the government. I know, I know, ....others disagree, that's ok.:)

Not at all. If I read something I find interesting, I post it for others to read.......not necessarily as an endorsement of the content....but more of...what do you think.

I am sure that was exactly what he was thinking.......

Me neither.

In 2004, Mormons were barred from conducting services during National Day of Prayer ceremonies by the group's task force chairwoman, Shirley Dobson.

I personally don't care if he chooses no to invite Jewish and Christian leaders to the White House in honor of the National Day of Prayer....which has existed on some level since George Washington. Had he continued the practice of GW Bush and too a lesser extent Clinton and Bush 41, there would probably have been a stir over who was or was not invited. Obama is a polarizing figure and in some instances no matter what you do, particularly as a politician, you are always scrutinized. Perhaps a better course of action, would have been to make a public statement encouraging Americans of all religious faiths to honor this day.....much like George Washington did:

The study touts that it improves on prior attempts to score economic freedom for American states in three primary ways: (1) it includes measures of social and personal freedoms such as peaceable citizens’ rights to educate their own children, own and carry firearms, and be free from unreasonable search and seizure; (2) it includes far more variables, even on economic policies alone, than prior studies, and there are no missing data on any variable; and (3) it uses new, more accurate measurements of key variables, particularly state fiscal policies. “We develop and justify our ratings and aggregation procedure on explicitly normative criteria, defining individual freedom as the ability to dispose of one’s own life, liberty, and justly acquired property however one sees fit, so long as one does not coercively infringe on another individual’s ability to do the same,” note the authors.

I'm not anti-government. I am for limited government. I want the government to do a few things very well. "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

Right wing, conservative, libertarian.......doesn't make it wrong. Less government intervention= more freedom.....IMO.