MarginOfError

Oh Charley...I used to like you. But I'm not sure I can go on liking someone who thinks The Memory Keeper's Daughter was an amazing book. :) I detested that book from about page 17 to the end. I haven't read The Forgotten Garden, but if you want a good book about awful consequences for immoral decisions, try The Once and Future King (T.H. White). Soon I hope to compare White's work to Tenney's and Chaucer's.

A valid point, and a good time to bring up to all the parents whose children will turn from adolescents to young adults in the future: the proper time to talk about and set these rules is BEFORE they're in college. In their junior year, when they begin looking at colleges, is the time to start talking about what rules and aspects of your relationship will change when they become young adults.

The Supreme Court will only be convening to determine if the case is worthy of oral argument. If fewer than four Justices vote to hear the arguments, it will be tossed. One of the Justices (Souter) has already rejected this case. Furthermore, this same case alleges that John McCain and Roger Calero were not eligible for their nominations. So far, it doesn't seem like a very creditable case. World News Daily article 1 World News Daily article 2 Hawaii officials declare Obama birth certificate genuine

Wow, you guys are incredibly harsh. I'm not sure I see a connection between her actions and the consequences you're suggesting. I mean, Wingnut made a good point If I dump my clean clothes on the floor, then I have to do my own laundry. But I don't see the logical progression of If I sleep over with my boyfriend, I have to pay for my own phone. What's more, the girl is in college. This is exactly where you want her to be at her age. It's quite possible that the majority of her day she is doing what she should be doing at her age, leaving only a portion of her time in question. What we want to be sure we do is apply discipline in a way that encourages the positive behaviors and discourages the negative while maintaining a clear link between cause and effect. We should also consider that she is an adult and is free to make her own decisions. I would start with grades. If her grades in school dropped below a certain threshold, I would start removing financial support. Make her find the money to pay her own tuition (if she isn't already). But make it clear you aren't going to finance a poor education. If she already pays for the tuition, then you can withdraw financial support via the phone or the car. Again, the point being, that as long as she performs well in school, you'll support her, but if she doesn't, then she needs to support herself. Next, if she isn't paying rent, then I think it's fair that you can set a curfew. Determine a time at which she needs to be home and have her check in with you. If she doesn't like that rule, then she can pay rent. As a tenant, she may have freedom to come and go as she pleases. Since it is your house, you can rightfully set rules about who may spend the night, and where they sleep in your house. Make it clear that she and her boyfriend may not, under any circumstances, spend the night in the same bed in your house (if in the same house at all). It's your house, so she has no legal recourse. Likely, she will choose to spend the night at his place. Personally, I don't think there is much you can do about this one. She is an adult now, and experimentation and stupid decisions will abound. But you can have a good talk about the potential consequences. Even if they aren't having intercourse, they may be doing everything leading to it. Explain that pregnancy and STD's are still possible from these things. Also, encourage her to speak to her physician and/or gynecologist about her actions. But if she chooses to continue the activities, she needs to accept responsibility for contraceptive use as well as the possibility of a pregnancy. Lastly, if she's going to continue these sleep overs, she should know that you might notify the bishop so that he can determine if any of their actions justify disciplinary action (assuming you're LDS). Depending on what she's doing, if she isn't willing to repent, she should know that she may find her membership in the Church in jeopardy. I don't advocate these suggestions as the best course of action. This is what I would do if it were my daughter. But if I find my daughter in such a situation, I may alter this plan in a way I feel is appropriate. You know your daughter better than we do, and probably understand how she will react better than we do. But I do encourage you to make the consequences a logical result of her actions. Finally, and this is of little comfort, she is an adult and may decide she prefers to make poor choices right now. As much as it hurts, let her. Do what you can to encourage good decisions, but give her the freedom to make bad decisions. And while it is okay to express disappointment, don't ever show anger. Always keep those channels of communication available and comfortable.

People who make statements like that should also have their votes taken away. And people called Obama an elitist?!

I haven't taken any Russians seriously since Kolmogorov and Smirnov.

Ground beef? Sorry, I couldn't resist.

I just wanted to break the estrogen chain.

They make a good point. I promise you, if you just use the bread, it will do you no harm for the rest of eternity. But I only make this promise because I'm pretty certain that allergies don't affect the dead.

That's another reason putting it in a plastic bag is helpful. If another kid does think it's cool and goes grabbing at it, the parent is likely to notice before any damage is done. Generally speaking, adults are typically smart enough to recognize that something in a bag on the Sacrament tray has a special purpose. If a suitable substitute can't be found, skipping the bread and only taking the water would likely be an acceptable option.

It looks like I'll need a little help. Searching on lds.org, the only references I could find that tie the words 'alcohol' and 'cook' (or any of its forms) were talks given by Gene R Cook in which he mentions alcohol. As of yet, I've not located anything that discusses using alcohol as an ingredient. I expanded the search to the internet at large. Surprisingly, I couldn't even find any anti-mormon stuff. I would have expected some criticism from the anti- community that we won't drink it but we will cook with it. Struck me as interesting that even the anti-'s don't care. I did find three mentions of it in the following: "Speculation also exists concerning the use of alcohol as a cooking ingredient or the use of decaffeinated coffee or tea.[citation needed] The church has taken no official stance on either." -- Wikipedia (Sorry Hemi) "Currently the only place I use alcohol in cooking is in deglazing a pan. If a sauce calls for alcohol I usually add it first, so that a majority of the alcohol cooks off. In a case like this, you'll be left with about 5 to 10% of the original alcohol content remaining. That'll leave you less alcohol than the same amount of commercial orange juice." Mormon Foodie. but this one makes no mention of an official statement...only opinion. "At a reception McKay attended, the hostess served rum cake. 'All the guests hesitated, watching to see what McKay would do. He smacked his lips and began to eat.' When one guest expostulated, 'But President McKay, don’t you know that is rum cake?' McKay smiled and reminded the guest that the Word of Wisdom forbade drinking alcohol, not eating it." David O. McKay and the Rise of Modern Mormonism, Gregory Prince and Wm. Robert Wright, p. 23. (Mormon Mentality) This actually has some interesting comments on it where McKay is criticized for this action. But again, nothing pointing to any official statement. So far, that's the best I've been able to do.

My apologies for misunderstanding. For my penance, I'll dress myself in sackcloth and burnt coffee beans. :)

And because I haven't said enough yet, if the thought makes you uncomfortable, I recommend not cooking with the bean/alcohol/chocolate/weird-looking-leftovers-in-the-back-of-the-fridge.

That's a pretty definitive statement on the link between caffeine and coffee/tea. Perhaps you should read a thread like this one, or any of the other myriad threads on the topic.

Please understand I'm not being snippy. I actually haven't ever heard this and am wondering if you can indicate when such statements have been made or by whom.

Don't just leave a note. If you have a camera, perhaps on your cell phone, take a picture of the damage. And anything you leave in writing with them, make sure you keep a word-for-word transcription of what you left them. It's no fun to do the honest thing and then find out you're paying for a dent, an oil pan, and new fan belts.

Sounds like you own stock in the publishing company

Who exactly are you accusing of having 'given into the lie?'

Ha ha...it took 17 hours and 47 minutes before someone finally thought of the obvious answer. Aren't we all a bunch of dopes! Fiannan, I'm actually not poking fun at you. This was a genuinely brilliant response.

I don't know, carl, perhaps you should think about taking on the name cooboo. It seems so cuddly...like a name you'd give a stuffed animal. :)

You're right, poverty isn't strictly a race issue. When people tie race to poverty it's because minorities are disproportionately affected by poverty: meaning we can correctly say that a person with black skin is more likely to live in poverty than a person with white skin. Keep in mind that these are just probabilities on the large scale. We just need to remembers, as you said, when you look at the individuals affected, the hardship of poverty on the individual is the same, regardless of race.

That comment is a bit out of line. The spectrum of what Latter-day Saints believe is pretty broad, ranging from zealous to flat out whacko. But that's okay. I just wish I could remember who it was that said "They that be whole need not a physician, but they that are sick." So we really shouldn't be questioning Peter's membership in the Church, nor yours for that matter (and especially not mine).

Sorry pam, this is the best place for this. I'll shut it now. Quite the contrary, actually. We know that we have the authority to terminate a pregnancy under certain circumstances. Namely, rape, incest, to protect the health of the mother, or when the child is not expected to live past birth. In all other cases and at all other times, we lack the authority to make that decision. There isn't much gray area there at all. You're "designing" discussions to show inconsistencies in thought processes? You're asking questions which you know will be answered in a way that gives you the perfect springboard into your platform? Excuse me for misunderstanding for some kind of superiority. Genuinely interested conversationalists would have started with "Well then how do you feel about the death penalty, because I feel that...." They style in which you did this tells me you wanted to come in swinging. Trust me, I understand dissent. But your form of dissent somehow doesn't breed those feelings of "I want to understand and to be understood." Mostly, it screams, "understand me!"

Another stellar example.