unixknight

We also have it pretty good compared to Europe, where gasoline is often two or three times as expensive.
The thing is, because  the U.S. economy relies so heavily on cars and trucks, a price increase affects us much more than it does to Europeans.  The majority of Americans drive to work, while the majority of Europeans use public transit.  We have a lot more trucks to move goods over much longer distances.  Not to mention railroads, which are almost entirely diesel powered in America while many European rail lines are electric.  
So we do have cheaper prices, but we're also more sensitive to market fluctuations.

Late to the party with an unpopular view.
I have a real problem with this.  Gonna be blunt here, and I mean no offense to anybody.
I really think the "but it's a public health risk" argument is WAY overblown.  The vast majority of people are vaccinated, yet people sometimes talk about anti-vaccine adherents as if they're the harbingers of the pandemic that will be the doom of all humanity.  They aren't.  It's just not that big a problem.  No, it just isn't.
Honestly... I think in most (not all, but most) cases it's a natural human instinct to want to impose control over others.  Libertarianism is the antithesis of this urge, while authoritarianism indulges it.  The vaccine issue is a way we can feel good about imposing control on others, and that's why even a significant chunk of the Libertarian movement are on board.  It's really, really easy to support curtailing someone else's liberty if you can do it with a good, convincingly emotional argument that has a dash of "it's science!" behind it.
Sorry to be more blunt than usual.  I'm not pointing fingers at anybody and I haven't read the thread, so please take no offense.

SCOTUS decides!  Peace Cross stays.
 
https://www.scotusblog.com/2019/06/opinion-analysis-justices-allow-peace-cross-to-stand/

First off, Congrats on being a DM for 30 years. I first started playing (mostly DM'ing in 1981) Gave it up for a while but back to it via the internet (Roll20) with 2 members of my original group (along with others). Good fun!
As far as Penny, sounds like you're better off without her, she sounds impossible to please, its either her way or the highway. I find that is more and more the case with extreme people  and frankly I remove those type of people from my social circle - don't need or want the drama.

I am politically moderate but would lean more conservative. Penny is toxic as are all SJW's. I don't know how calling people Nazi's is ever acceptable. I had an old high school friend once who called me a racist on facebook because I wanted to control illegal immigration. I told him to go F off because I had spent more time helping hispanics (via my mission) than he could ever understanding. He apologized and said "I didn't know..." in which I replied of course he didn't know and until he knows he should not throw around such an awful insult endless you have evidence of that claim. We aren't friends anymore because the SJW mindset is toxic and hateful in my experience. I have democratic friends who want to help the dispossessed, however SJW's are a no go.
Friends don't call friends Nazi's and racists without facts. I don't have people in my life like that.

Thanks for all the input, guys.
At this point my regular group now consists of the grown-ups who act like grown-ups that I mentioned earlier.  It's a shame, because I would have considered Penny's husband to be among those... and not just him.  Another of these friends is married to a guy who is a lightning rod for discord in the group, and I'll miss having her in the games as well.
Neither Penny nor her husband has approached me for info regarding a game session for them, and I'm taking that as a sign of lack of interest.  I don't doubt that they'd come if I invited them, but overall I don't really want to run two concurrent groups.  To be honest, it wouldn't be the same anymore, anyway.  My respect for Penny as a person has tanked, and my patience with the passive aggressive nature of the comments from the others has worn off in the wake of all of this.  
As I said, I'd always dreaded the day politics caused a fracture in our group.  I did what I could to prevent it and now, arguably, I'm the one who ultimately pulled the trigger...  It's sad and it's painful but I refuse to take the blame.  The only thing I wish I'd done differently was to pull the plug sooner.  I could have saved myself a lot of stress.

That jerk? I wouldn't have anything to do with him.
Oh wait, I thought you said Peter Jordanson. Carry on.
 

Remind me to never let you drive me anywhere.

Rethink the above sentence.  
When I was a young man, I made a lot of impulsive decisions for exactly the same reason.  "Better stick with her, because who knows if another compatible person will ever come into my life!"   
You're not even out of college yet.  Have faith that the Lord will direct you to the person you're meant to be with.  If you're not emotionally connected to this guy, just physically, then you're right, it's a road you don't want to go down.  Best case scenario:  You marry the guy in order to keep from sinning and now what will you do?  Get sealed to a dude you're not even in love with?  Yeah, no.  
Be patient and have faith.  The right guy is out there.  Don't let this fellow you go to school with get in his way.  

Yeah man, definitely worrying WAY too much... as in, worrying > 0 is too much here.
Obviously you know what you're supposed to be doing and not doing, and the fact that you care about it so much means that your heart and mind are otherwise right where they should be.  You're okay.  Stop worrying and no, you don't have anything to feel guilty over.
Stray thoughts come to mind for all of us, bro.  As you went down the list of incidents in your mind, I kept thinking "yep, me too."  The fact that you can tell your wife about it is awesome, because that means she trusts you and knows how to contextualize that stuff.  It's the same way with me.   In fact, she and I joke about it all the time.  I was  talking once with my Bishop about things in general and the conversation got onto these things, and he said the same thing I'm telling you here:
You can't necessarily control the stray thoughts that come into your mind.  What you can control is whether you feed those thoughts and what you do or don't do about them.  Clearly you aren't doing anything to encourage them, and you aren't acting on them.  That's where you should be.  

My wife @Dollfacekilla and I have been married for 12 years.  
And this coming Saturday...
...at the Philadelphia Temple...
...we're getting Sealed.  
..finally.  
Just, ya know, thought some of you might like to know 
 

Same here.  A few years ago I was talking with someone and she laughed out loud when I commented that my wife joined a feminist group with a pro-life focus.  This person thought it was hilarious that someone could be pro-life AND consider herself a feminist at the same time.  Essentially playing gatekeeper.  If you don't pass this ideological test, you won't be taken seriously.
That's intensely annoying.

Ftfy.

Here's my typical conversations when this comes up (this is not an exaggeration--actually happened several times):
Friend: try this coffee! So good!
Beef: no thanks.
Friend: why? it's really good! I hated coffee until I tried this. Try it!
Beef: no, I don't drink coffee and honestly hate even the smell of it. Look at that lady's purse! It's so pretty!
Friend: just try it. 
Beef: no, it's also against my religion. Seriously, did you see that purse? Loved the teal color!
Friend: what? Why? What's wrong with coffee? Your Mountain Dew has caffeine too!
Beef: it's not about the caffeine. I've made a promise to God that I won't drink coffee, or tea, or alcohol, or smoke, or take drugs. I love teal, but don't have a teal purse. Do you have one?
Friend: I get the smoking and drugs, but coffee? tea? alcohol? What's wrong with them? Even in moderation, a little alcohol is good.
Beef: it's against my religion. I made a promise to God. Where did you get your purse?
Friend: but, coffee is healthy! And drinking wine is healthy! Don't you want to be healthy?
Beef: I don't know if there is anything wrong with them. But, I made a promise to God to not drink them. Can we talk about purses now? I'm not changing my mind about the coffee. So, where's the best place to get a teal purse?
 

I have a daemon for each of your Inquisitors.
 

 
 
 
 

And I've got a 100 Grey Knights for each of your Daemons

So last night I was invited to the home of a co-worker for dinner.  It's Ramadan, so it was a breaking of the fast.  (In Islamic tradition, during Ramadan you fast during the day and eat once the sun goes down.)
Man, the food was incredible.  It was a blend of Tunisian and Spanish (as in Spain spanish) food.
But that wasn't my realization.
During dinner, everybody had white wine except me, and after dinner I was offered Turkish coffee but I declined.  Total resulting drama:  Zero.
What I mean is this... When I'm among non-LDS Christians or Atheists, I don't like to discuss matters like the Word of Wisdom because more often than not I get funny looks, incredulous laughing, or taunting about how silly it is that we can't have [insert whatever beverage here].   Sometimes I get a lecture about how a certain amount of alcohol daily is good for you, or how there's nothing wrong with a cup of tea. 
When I'm among Muslims however, (and in my experience this is also true of Hindu folks) when I say I'm unable to partake in those things because of my religious beliefs, they understand completely and that's that.  They just get it.  No offense is taken, no criticism, no exaggerated eye rolls.  They respect it because they have their own dietary rules.  It often leads to an enlightening and friendly conversation about our different beliefs and traditions.  
But man... Tunisian food...  I'm gonna be daydreaming about that stuff for a while.

What I said was "when I say I'm unable to partake in those things because of my religious beliefs, they understand completely and that's that."  Nowhere did I say anything that could reasonably be interpreted as "giving a big speech," as you accused me of doing.
And yes, I will bother with an explanation because I am asked why.  That's still not the same as "giving a big speech."
Whatever hostility or pre-conceived assumptions you may have, please don't lay them on me.

So last night I was invited to the home of a co-worker for dinner.  It's Ramadan, so it was a breaking of the fast.  (In Islamic tradition, during Ramadan you fast during the day and eat once the sun goes down.)
Man, the food was incredible.  It was a blend of Tunisian and Spanish (as in Spain spanish) food.
But that wasn't my realization.
During dinner, everybody had white wine except me, and after dinner I was offered Turkish coffee but I declined.  Total resulting drama:  Zero.
What I mean is this... When I'm among non-LDS Christians or Atheists, I don't like to discuss matters like the Word of Wisdom because more often than not I get funny looks, incredulous laughing, or taunting about how silly it is that we can't have [insert whatever beverage here].   Sometimes I get a lecture about how a certain amount of alcohol daily is good for you, or how there's nothing wrong with a cup of tea. 
When I'm among Muslims however, (and in my experience this is also true of Hindu folks) when I say I'm unable to partake in those things because of my religious beliefs, they understand completely and that's that.  They just get it.  No offense is taken, no criticism, no exaggerated eye rolls.  They respect it because they have their own dietary rules.  It often leads to an enlightening and friendly conversation about our different beliefs and traditions.  
But man... Tunisian food...  I'm gonna be daydreaming about that stuff for a while.

I used to be politically on the side of making exceptions in cases of rape/incest,  but I stopped because of exactly this problem.  If somebody wants an abortion badly enough, they'd now be incentivized (sp?) to  falsely accuse someone.  And as much as I wish I could believe that such incidents would be vanishingly rare, We already have a problem with retroactive accusations of rape these days with no incentive at all.

Mission Accomplished.

I used to be politically on the side of making exceptions in cases of rape/incest,  but I stopped because of exactly this problem.  If somebody wants an abortion badly enough, they'd now be incentivized (sp?) to  falsely accuse someone.  And as much as I wish I could believe that such incidents would be vanishingly rare, We already have a problem with retroactive accusations of rape these days with no incentive at all.

I used to be politically on the side of making exceptions in cases of rape/incest,  but I stopped because of exactly this problem.  If somebody wants an abortion badly enough, they'd now be incentivized (sp?) to  falsely accuse someone.  And as much as I wish I could believe that such incidents would be vanishingly rare, We already have a problem with retroactive accusations of rape these days with no incentive at all.

I haven't read the text so I don't know, but I'd be very surprised if there weren't a provision for cases like that under the umbrella of "medically necessary."  Otherwise I'd call that a serious oversight.

I know that this is a very controversial hot-button issue.  And I know there are Latter-day Saints on both sides.   But I find it surprising how little the church actually talks about it given how hot of an issue it is right now.  There was one brief mention of it in Elder Anderson’s recent conference address while speaking about the Proclamation.  
Now there is this new Alabama law bill signed into law.   I am actually shocked at how strict it is.  It goes even further than the church’s policy.   No exceptions for rape and incest.  A life is a life even  if it is conceived in a wicked manner.
Personally I am on the pro-life side.  I understand the pro-choice side but I feel siding with the life of the baby to be the morally superior position.   It’s the more excellent way.   I find myself cheering for Alabama.
 Should Latter-day Saints embrace a stricter position on abortion like what we are seeing in Alabama?  Does the church’s position fall short?  Or is this Alabama bill too extreme?