bytebear

The problem is the pro-choice side has to ignore very obvious facts, like a father is always biologically involved.  They want you to believe there was no father, and therefor no need to involve him.  And they pretend the baby is not a separate life than the mother.  You simply cannot discuss the topic when the other person cannot acknowledge these two obvious facts.

He suffocates and dies?

He suffocates and dies?

The problem is the pro-choice side has to ignore very obvious facts, like a father is always biologically involved.  They want you to believe there was no father, and therefor no need to involve him.  And they pretend the baby is not a separate life than the mother.  You simply cannot discuss the topic when the other person cannot acknowledge these two obvious facts.

The problem with a middle road on abortion is that the baby is dead. He isn't almost dead®, he's totally dead.
And, whatever sacrifice it may entail (speaking as the father of 7 children and grandfather of 33, as well as the eldest with 6 siblings, all of which pregnancies but three I saw in some proximity), that death rarely, and I mean rarely, can be justified by the sacrifice required.
Adoption (speaking as the grandfather of 3 adoptees) is always a better choice, always. Always for the child, always for the father (the forgotten man), always for the mother.
Lehi

We got mistaken for immigration agents in heavily Spanish areas.  Or "Men in Black". 

We got mistaken for immigration agents in heavily Spanish areas.  Or "Men in Black". 

We got mistaken for immigration agents in heavily Spanish areas.  Or "Men in Black". 

In New England, many houses have screened in porches, and one day, I mistook the front door for the screen porch door, and walked right into the living room, where the lady of the house freaked out and chased us out.  I still feel bad. 
Other than that, I was hit by a car on my bike and bruised my ankle pretty bad.  And we had our fair share of people answering the door in various degrees of undress.

Two thoughts.  First, for membership in the church, you need to obey certain commandments.  Yes, the degree at which they affect our happiness is different, but a cup of coffee can keep you out of the waters of baptism too.
Second, commandments aren't punishments.  They are paths to greater rewards.  What that means is, if you choose a same sex relationship, you now have no option than to include at least a third person in building a family, and that third person will have to give up a child to make someone else whole.  So, just by choosing a certain path, you are already either denying yourself blessings, or creating a situation where someone loses blessings.
But, the biggest issue I have is the denial of these facts.  And this is not the only place where people have changed society to "better themselves", "gotten more rights" or "liberated themselves" at the expense of other blessings, and to the point where society has dictated individual choices and made it very difficult to survive if you want to be a stay at home mom, for example.
 

I think if you take it from the LDS perspective though, the interpretation changes.  Peter was the head of the church.  Jesus created a "First Presidency" on the mount of transfiguration, and as such, we see Peter having the same role as our current prophet and president.  As such, he was correcting misinterpretation, and trying to make people understand that the church is led by a hierarchy.  Peter himself was creating new scripture as he spoke, and his words were just as important as the prophecies of old, just as today, church prophets/presidents are for instruction and correction, and creation of continuing revelation and scripture.

I think if you take it from the LDS perspective though, the interpretation changes.  Peter was the head of the church.  Jesus created a "First Presidency" on the mount of transfiguration, and as such, we see Peter having the same role as our current prophet and president.  As such, he was correcting misinterpretation, and trying to make people understand that the church is led by a hierarchy.  Peter himself was creating new scripture as he spoke, and his words were just as important as the prophecies of old, just as today, church prophets/presidents are for instruction and correction, and creation of continuing revelation and scripture.

OK well temple stuff aside I'm going to get baptised next weekend. 

Honestly, I would just respond with, "Thank you so much.  This is really helpful."  And the use her stuff or not.  It will make her feel helpful (which I am sure that's all she is trying to be) and although it won't stop her, at least you have a pat answer for when she does it again.  And you have no obligation to use her notes or not.  And you really don't need to worry about it beyond that.

We don't know.  There is a lot of speculation.  But what we do know is everyone will end up where they are most happy and joyful.  God knows our hearts and will not have us be uncomfortable situations for eternity. 

We don't know.  There is a lot of speculation.  But what we do know is everyone will end up where they are most happy and joyful.  God knows our hearts and will not have us be uncomfortable situations for eternity. 

We don't know.  There is a lot of speculation.  But what we do know is everyone will end up where they are most happy and joyful.  God knows our hearts and will not have us be uncomfortable situations for eternity. 

Honestly, I would just respond with, "Thank you so much.  This is really helpful."  And the use her stuff or not.  It will make her feel helpful (which I am sure that's all she is trying to be) and although it won't stop her, at least you have a pat answer for when she does it again.  And you have no obligation to use her notes or not.  And you really don't need to worry about it beyond that.

Honestly, I would just respond with, "Thank you so much.  This is really helpful."  And the use her stuff or not.  It will make her feel helpful (which I am sure that's all she is trying to be) and although it won't stop her, at least you have a pat answer for when she does it again.  And you have no obligation to use her notes or not.  And you really don't need to worry about it beyond that.

I believe that bytebear is correct because most conservatives (which should not be confused with Republicans, but for simplicity in this discussion, we'll conflate them) believe that progressives (again, not the same as the Democrat Party) are misinformed, or have not thought about the issues very deeply: they're just reacting emotionally.
Progressives, on the other hand, think that conservatives are evil because they do not want to use the coercive power of the state, the potentially lethal power of government, to force people to have the same outcomes, that they (the conservatives) must want the poor to be poor. It's absurd, of course, but that's what I've noticed when trying to have this kind of discussion with a progressive.
My F-i-L once assumed that "we can agree that people deserve to eat." I did not, because, if everyone deserves to eat, it means that those who do not produce food (or the means to exchange for it) have that right to force someone who does to give it to him. Except for children and the physically or mentally incapable (who, by nature, cannot produce enough to support themselves, and have a legitimate right to eat, as long as their parents produce sufficient), people who do not contribute to the general well being of their neighbors are those the scriptures say who do not labor, and should not eat the bread, nor wear the clothes of the laborer. He then said, "at least we can agree with King Benjamin {do not suffer the beggar to put up his petition in vain]." I can, and do, agree with that, but there is a huge difference between his propositions.
Progressives must ignore the very nature of mankind, not necessarily the "natural man", although that can be a part of it, when they assume that if each gets according to his needs, he will give according to his ability. It just ain't so. Further, it stifles, nay, it eliminates all progress to take away the ordinary benefits of creativity. Why invent the telephone if there is no way to reap the rewards that others will gain by it? Why develop the cell phone when the good from it goes to others, and not you? They want to control the schools to inculcate and indoctrinate the children of others to support their goals and means.
Conservatives are wrong, too, in that most of them (remember, I'm a libertarian) want to use the coercive. lethal power of the state to make everyone follow whatever "moral" path they believe correct. Drugs? Ban them, and put those who want to use them in prison (where they learn to be better criminals). Sex? Throw adulterers in jail, or take their stuff. This list, too, is nearly endless. They want to control the schools to inculcate and indoctrinate the children of others to support their goals and means.
Libertarians, on the other hand (no, there is no third — both of the above want to use the power of government to control), want persuasion, reason, demonstration to convert, to "teach … correct principles [so] they govern themselves." Is sexual fidelity good? Teach it, and show the benefits. Is charity (not welfare) good? Show how, by actions and precept. Et cetera, etc., &c. Brute force is for animals in the jungle. Mankind is a higher species, but we don't often act like it.
Lehi

I would disagree with your assessment of the right.  It's Statism vs Federalism (i.e. Big government vs local government).  The right is fine with government, as are libertarians who are not anarchists. But they want real representation and a say in how their tax dollars are spent, ideally at a local level.  I..e no education spending or taxation outside the local school district, and no federal mandates or financial enticements or bailouts.  The Constitution was a minimalist form of government.
I also heard recently an interesting notion about Liberalism vs Conservatism when it comes to the Constitution.  Conservatives want to conserve the purpose and intent of the Constitution.  Liberals want to interpret and view the document liberally, allowing changes and modifications in the way the laws are enacted, interpreted and enforced.
I have a very liberal friend who recently began his career as an attorney, and his whole ideology is how he can get around the law and win at all costs, regardless of whether his view was constitutionally sound.  He is in his own little world, and literally thinks everyone must be just like him.  He recently stated something like "Well, everyone thinks X is wrong." and I left him gobsmacked when I stated, "No, half the country thinks X is right."  Left him literally speechless.

But there is an old saying.  Republicans think Democrats are wrong. Democrats think Republicans are evil.

I can't reconcile the notion that we had full knowledge or even any knowledge of our own final judgement.  This goes against the fact that we have free will, both now and in our pre-existence.   After all, if you knew you were going to get Celestial glory, why would you not want to follow Christ and not Satan?  And if you knew you were going to go into Outer Darkness, why would you not just hang with Satan?  Heck, even if you knew you were going to get Terrestrial glory, why would you not want to go for the plan that saves everyone?

Getting rid of the Electoral College would be a disaster.  Imagine a close election like we had in Florida.  But now, the margin of error is at a national level, and the recounts must be done nationally.  Nope, the Electoral College stops the debates everywhere, and lets the delegates be localized to avoid such a mess.

And big states like California do need to be split up.  And I would like to see the 17th Amendment repealed allowing for the appointment of the Senate and not the election of it.  That would help so much with political corruption, and wasted time on elections.

I think you are onto a good start.  Get to know their interests, and engage them in them.  But keep up because kids shift quickly onto new and interesting things.  If you show a real interest in their activities the rest will follow naturally.