MarginOfError

This is deserving of my Grapefruit Speech, but I don't want to type it again, and I can't find it. Anyone remember where I posted my Grapefruit Speech?

It's funny how different people are. If I had more friends in the Church, I'd probably attend less. I've never been so confident in my testimony as when I was living with womanizing drunkards!

I know how you feel...I love my spouse too, but she just doesn't make satisfy my need to feel close to other women. Wait....something isn't right there. I don't really have friends at Church. Most of the time I'm not really inclined to make friends at Church. Part of it is I just don't care, and the other part is I don't really care to be friends with them. The people I am developing better relationships with are the people I work with in Scouts (I work with an Episcopalian troop), and the other scoutmasters in the troop are the men I really seek to emulate. When I'm at Church, I spend most of my time with the people I"m called to serve with. I have good relationships with them, and I do genuinely care about them, but I just feel no inclination to do anything to convert that relationship into a lifelong bond.

Or could it be that taking the rib from Adam was a symbolic way to make the statement that Adam would never be complete without Eve?

Statistically speaking, you're not immortal...you're right censored

Palerider's advice is what I would say, too. Bishops have general guidelines for when to let people go to the temple, but ultimately it's about your emotional and spiritual maturity. If both you and your bishop feel you've reached a point where your emotional and spiritual maturity is at a point that taking on temple covenants is the next step of your progression, then that will happen, regardless of your age. I commend you on working toward such a noble goal. I just hope that you won't be disappointed if your bishop feels a little more time is needed. If you trust him and wait to go until you both feel that it is what you need, then your temple experiences will be infinitely better.

For the sake of one-upsmanship English, R, S+, Ukrainian, TI (Texas Instruments Calculators) SAS, html, Java, C+, Russian So take that! (Note to the lay person: R and S+ are nearly identical, as are Java and C+, and Ukraininan and Russian)

Except Lehi left all his fortunes in Jerusalem. So by the time he was in the wilderness, he was a poor wanderer (or average is probably a better description).

What about Daniel? Let's not forget why the wise men in Babylonian courts were called wise...they were academics, many of whom specialized in algebra (the first solutions to quadratic equations came from the Babylonians), and astrology. Daniel and his buddies were very influential in Babylonian government and may very well have taught some of their colleagues about Christ. It's plausible that some of these teachings were written down, or passed down orally, and certain of the scholars may have been converted over time. In fact, the Jews were very well respected in government after Ahasuerus (Esther's husband). What's more, not all of the Jews returned to Jerusalem after the Babylonian captivity. The magi may actually have been of Jewish descent; their ancestors may have been among those who never left Babylon. It actually seems pretty unlikely to me that Lehi's teachings eventually resulted in the travels of the magi. Lehi was a poor wanderer in the wilderness. How would he gain access to any court of enough influence to have people so educated in astrology (astrology then was like rocket science today)? We don't even have enough evidence to say that the magi were monotheistic. If they came from a polytheistic culture, they may have come to worship yet another god. So I guess I'm with checkers here...this seems like a stretch at giving the Book of Mormon more presence than it is due. While it is certainly plausible, it's entirely speculative, and certainly isn't the most plausible explanation for where the magi came from, nor for why they chose to come.

I think we just discovered the solution...socialized medicine. Did you notice that countries with some form of universal health care are taking fewer medications? So if you want the over medication to stop, just move toward socialized medicine!

1. Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (100%) 2. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) (89%) 3. Baha'i Faith (87%) 4. Mainline to Conservative Christian/Protestant (83%) 5. Sikhism (81%) 6. Jehovah's Witness (77%) 7. Christian Science (Church of Christ, Scientist) (71%) 8. Orthodox Quaker (67%) 9. Liberal Quakers (66%) 10. Unitarian Universalism (63%) 11. Mahayana Buddhism (62%) 12. Eastern Orthodox (61%) 13. Hinduism (61%) 14. Roman Catholic (61%) 15. Theravada Buddhism (60%) 16. Orthodox Judaism (59%) 17. Reform Judaism (56%) 18. Seventh Day Adventist (56%) 19. Jainism (55%) 20. Neo-Pagan (52%) 21. New Age (51%) 22. New Thought (49%) 23. Scientology (44%) 24. Islam (43%) 25. Taoism (34%) 26. Secular Humanism (29%) 27. Nontheist (14%) Apparently, I'm not really LDS.

The Dirty Dozen

I go backpacking two days and the whole world starts coming unglued! Bush is laughing about an attempted assassination by footwear?The energizer bunny has wings?Mary is no longer a virgin? John Doe is telling jokes!?If I had known that my presence was so vital to the stability of this site I never would have left.

Just a note for you women, cola drinks inhibit the body's ability to process Vitamin D and Calcium, which are pretty essential in preventing osteoporosis. This effect becomes very pronounced after menopause. I'm not saying you have to give it up entirely, nor do I think you should eliminate one of the joys of life (Pepsi, that is), but please consume sparingly (particularly after menopause). Okay, I'm done playing mom.

They should hope so. If a prophet is never judged, he'll be hanging out in limbo for eternity, and believe me, and eternity of limbo will make your back really sore.

Impossible you say? Haven't you ever seen Pinnochio?

Would that mean Big Government and Big Business are shallow--size really does matter?

That's really funny. That's also why you don't listen to philosophers! :) My favorite sentence in that whole thing: "In the 1994-2002 General Social Surveys (GSS), Republicans have over 6/10ths of a year more education on average than Democrats." woo hoo! 6/10ths!

Really? I was under the impression that businessmen tended to conservative policies. Maybe that's just the businessmen I know, though.

This article, and the research done to produce it, has numerous flaws and misinterpretations. The chief misinterpretation is that Democrats are smarter than Republicans. That is the most twisted interpretation of these results imaginable, but it's catchy (face it, it's all about sensationalism). I also can't stand their use of the word "average" as it has very little statistical meaning. If they are using the average as we think of it--the arithmetic mean--then this article is complete garbage. If they used the median, then it might reflect some interesting patterns in education and politics. Enjoy. I'll be expecting hate mail in my inbox! How the Rich Are Different From You and MePlaces that went for Obama are richer and smarter than places that went for McCain.

Oops, sorry. I read King Bark. I was like...huh?

I want to do some more specifics on that, actually. It might be more accurate to say, "you marry who you court." So I would recommend not courting anyone who doesn't fit the profile of who you would like to marry (and yes, selecting a spouse is very much a discriminating process). So while it is entirely appropriate to go on dates with women of other faiths (or no faith at all), if you want to marry a person of a certain religion, it's best to restrict your courtships to people of that religion. That being said, the colloquial use of the term 'dating' is often synonymous with 'courting.' So just make sure you know which you really mean, regardless of which term you use. See Elder Oak's talk The Dedication of A Lifetime (CES Broadcast, May 2005) for more about friendship, dating, and courtship.

If she doesn't understand that the temple recommend in your pocket is a more accurate gauge of your character than your missionary service (or lack thereof), then she probably isn't of much interest anyway.

This just opens the question of which is better: a) Going to Church but having a broken marriage, or b) Not going to Church and saving your marriage You can make a really strong case either way.

Child Labor Laws Workers Compensation OSHA yeah, none of those have ever benefitted any American citizen.