MarginOfError

Actually it was Pascal's bah mitzvah. He does seem quite adorable though!

I fell out of that tree when I was four. Explains I lot, I'm sure The fact that your statement isn't definitive kind of bothers me.

So this morning while I was waiting for my clothes to dry, I finally (hee hee) got around to (snicker snicker) putting up some (giggles) pictures on my (ho ho ho hoooo) profile. You should check them out.

You seem to be having some memory problems (can't remember your gender?). Are you sure you aren't pregnant?

The method is one we studied in my persuasion classes. The approacher is trying to put you in a state of Cognitive Dissonance. She approached you and established you as a 'Good Christian Person' and then tried to drop the bomb on you saying that she needed help--help that a good christian person wouldn't hesitate to give. The fact that you seem disturbed, and that you felt the need to write about tells me that she was successful, and did indeed create the Cognitive Dissonance she desired (although apparently without the desired end result). The tactic is one designed to put the two people in agreement with each other before all the information is available, thereby making the request harder to deny. It is widely considered an unethical approach (except in very isolate circumstances), and so I don't think there's any reason a person should feel guilty denying a request when approached in such a manner. There's the professional part of my comments. Now for something completely different: I was at scouts on night and one of the other Assistant Scout Masters was telling me he needed to leave early to get to his interfaith volleyball team. They were playing the Mormons that night, and he really wanted to be there. Apparently, the mormon team hadn't been representing the Church too well and there was a lot of animosity against them (when the LDS team was up by 10 points, they were still spiking the ball as hard as they could against a significantly older team, and at one point, hit a woman on the other team in the head an nearly knocked her unconscious). I remember this guy saying a few things about the team and then commenting, "I know, that isn't very Christian to say about them, but they aren't Christians, so it doesn't matter." I just started chuckling, and I guess from the way I was grinning he could tell I must be Mormon. Poor guy felt so bad.

I read in the October 2002 (?) issue of Discover Magazine (I'm fuzzy on the date, but I"m sure it was around then) about the moon and some comparisons between the geological structure of the moon and the earth. One of the things they pointed out was that the rocks on earth contain a certain amount of water. In fact, it was estimated, that if all of the water in those rocks could be drawn out, it would be enough water to fill the oceans six over. That's a lot of water! and I suppose one possible interpretation of the 'fountains of the great deep' (see below). Disclaimer: I do not endorse this interpretation. Just food for thought.

Umm...hello eye candy!

plus or minus 6.39%

While I appreciate your kindness, I can't help but chuckle. If you really want to apologize, using the meetinghouse locator on mormon.org, you can probably find the phone number of the meetinghouse those elders attend. Give the number a call on Sunday during the services and someone will be able to find them. Then you can apologize to them yourself. That seems like a lot of work to me though. I'd suggest just chuckling about it and being happy that you gave several of us here a chuckle too. Welcome!

I just want to point out that I'm a Windows user, and I hate Windows.

The intent of my comments was 1) we are no better at not demonizing other religions than those you claim demonize us, and 2) the demonization occurs because we interpret other's beliefs using a self-referential lens. I will concede that perhaps your comments do not qualify as demeaning, but they are diminutive in that you've effectively ignored the rationale for a belief in infant baptism or the absence of modern day prophets. You are adamantly opposed to their conclusions, but you fail to recognize that it is not their conclusion that is incorrect, but their conjecture. This is the same error others make in attacking our beliefs. Yet, surprisingly, if you truly study and come to an understanding of the foundation of another religion's creeds, you find that their conclusions are all very logical. So, before you go saying things like, "why do they ridicule us for waiting to baptize our children until they have a clue about life" -- and thereby showing great insensitivity and intolerance toward their belief -- perhaps you should investigate why they believe we should baptize our children earlier. For the record, if others showed our religion the same courtesy, we wouldn't have to talk about this nonsense.

Could it be that when we talk about their beliefs we phrase it in such a way that is demeaning and diminutive of the things they hold sacred? Or does that fact just mean that we really aren't much better than they are?

We once built a jump at the side of a road for our sleds. The road was at the bottom of a big hill and the idea was to get enough air to be able to jump over a car. We never had the guts to actually take the jump when traffic was coming, but in theory, it would have worked.

You're jogging again? I'm sorry! :) I ran cross country and track in high school. I've never been able to run since then without getting hyper competitive. That's why I'm the tub of lard I am today.

Since no one has mentioned it, we also expect you to give your first born child to the Church. You'll have to report to the Church when your child is about to be born, and men in black suits with black shirts and black ties (and neon green socks) will show up at the hospital to collect your child. I'd hate for you to get blind-sided with that one.

In other words, Don't worry, Be happy:)

My eyes bugged out of my head when I saw this because I thought you'd said a 'naughty bedtime routine.' I think I may need glasses finally (I'm the only one in my family who didn't have glasses before age 20). However, a naughty bedtime routine might help. Statistically speaking, it works for most men.

You should be ashamed for not mentioning the Book of Mormon and Joseph Smith. Indeed, your friends are correct--you failed to bare an honest and true testimony if you missed these elements. I'm also guessing you failed to follow the Church-wide accepted protocol of proper testimony baring. These protocol are: 1) Thou shalt begin your testimony with "I would like to bare my testimony that I know the Church is true" 2) Thou shalt state in unambiguous terms that Joseph Smith was a prophet of God 3) Thou shalt state that the Book of Mormon is the word of God 4) If any fewer than two Articles of Faith are quoted, it is not considered a testimony 5) If no tears are shed, your words will be considered "comments" instead of a "testimony" 6) At least 1 mention to family must be given, preferably with regard to how many quilts your mother made. If you failing to meet these requirements for your testimony, I also will assume that your prayers are inadequate. For this reason, I recommend you practice reciting the following prayer: Please check back and update us on your progress toward an appropriate testimony.

First, let me reaffirm what Elphs just said. Perhaps I'll say more when I get to work.

At some point, and I can't tell you what this point is, you might want to take a break from going after them. If you go after them for too long, it will just become the ritual to throw you off and they may even come to resent the unwelcome persistence. Sometimes it helps to stop trying for a month or two, then resume your efforts. You might also ask them specifically what things they like to do, and plan activities that are obviously intended to get them to come. It probably won't work, but they'll notice that you went out of their way to plan something for them (even if they don't show any sign that they noticed).

I'm not sure I could think of anything my wife's done for me that doesn't involve lingerie:whistling: Okay, that's exceptionally not true. But she humors me when we go camping and I want to do all the cooking over the fire and in the dutch ovens even though hot dogs and foil dinners would be easier. She talks about how pretty our rose bushes look even though I bought the wrong color. Well, so much for exceptionally not true...I honestly can't think of anything else she's done. As for stuff that I like to do...geez, if the bathroom is clean and the dishes are put away I'm a happy happy man.

The temple was reserved as the place to perform ordinances for those who have passed on. That's the only reason. Before the Nauvoo Temple was completed the Lord did allow baptisms for the dead to be performed outside the temple, but only until the temple was completed. I think that the more appropriate question you should be asking is if a living person can be baptized outside the temple, why can't he or she receive the Endowment or Sealing outside the temple. But again, the answer comes down to, "because we were told to." Allow me to hijack the thread for a minute: I once was asked why we perform baptism by immersion. I simply said, "Because God said so." Someone else decided I should be corrected and explained all the symbolism of baptism by immersion. When they were finished, I pointed out that there was a difference between the reason and the choice of mode. The reason we are baptized by immersion is because Christ said we should do it this way. The motivation for the choice of immersion was driven by the symbolism. But if Christ had designated that baptism by goose feathers in a pie plate, it would still hold the same covenants and purpose. It's Christ's atonement, so we get to play by his rules.

How much more would it cost to get one printed upside down?

Congratulations on having received such a prestigious honor!