OmahaLDS

I would agree, and it is difficult for the few new converts to go surrounded by teens. I would not necessarily say there is a stigma, but it is somewhat uncomfortable and that should not be ignored. Nevertheless the people I have seen go seem to like it. We have discussed having an adults only BFTD session in our branch as a way to ease the discomfort for new adult converts. I will let you know how it goes.

What if I found your comment uncalled for? Let's honestly compare the situations. What if I find it offensive when people comment without actually conducting research (usually as simple as reading) first? There are scores of subjects here where not much effort goes into the opinion before it is posted. I would think that the responsibility for the comments rests with the individual making them, not someone for pointing out how uninformed they are. I have never understood why people get upset when they put so little effort into education before making comments, but that may simply be the Aspergers speaking.

It is not condescending. The difference was that I read the article. I am not the "expert on everything," but between us I read the article and you did not. This does give me an edge in opinion formation. If you want to get angry, why get angry at me? I have never claimed to be "the expert on everything" but I do actually wait until I have read up on something before I form an opinion. Marx is one of the most popular figures in modern political discourse, but I would hazard that only 2% of so of the people involved have actually read Marx. This is not expertise by any stretch of the imagination, but it does help.

If you read the article it said only 3% of eligible participants claimed the credit, and 80% of those were not complying with the requirements. So out of the 3%, only .6% of those eligible were complying with the requirements. If this is accurate it seems like a good place to start cutting. Also it is not eliminating the EIC, but the AEIC, which is different. Edit: FWIW, the article is only 181 words long, according to Word.

Assuming that O'Keefe is an American Patriot, I assume that means he believes in America. Therefore his accused actions would be violating both the letter of the law and spirit of the law that America believes it. This is a contradictory stance. It is like saying that he was a patriot, but willing to sacrifice what he believes in because he believes in it so much? This does not make sense. Like someone who respects life so much that they kill someone.

I suspect the comment was ironic, tongue-in-cheek.

I was honestly very, pleasantly, surprised to see how much these actions have been condemned by both sides of the isle.

If you want to understand the NT, BOM, or even D&C, you need to understand the OT. Jesus was a marginal Jew, after all, and it helps to understand Judaism before understanding what came out of Judaism. You might want to study Judaism itself for a while to get an idea of how the OT affected the people that lived in Jesus' day. Modern Judaism is an outgrowth of the Pharisee movement, so you need to perform some historical regression from modern times back to the OT, but it is extremely interesting. It will take a while, but you will probably get more out of the NT and BOM in the long run.

What measures? Edit: I think we get into dangerous territory when the government actually starts defining family and taking action to fit the government definition. I am not sure government is really capable of doing something like defining family any more than they could define love.

I tend to agree with Oscar Wilde, "Bigamy is having one wife too many. Monogamy is the same."

But liberals are not interested in having their beliefs dictated to them. They are more interested in forming their own opinions.

I am not entirely certain. We have discussed this at the secret meetings. A good friend of mine, fellow liberal, once commented that after watching Rachel Maddow (sp?) she understood how it could be easy to fall into the trap of listening to people who share their ideas, but she forced herself to stop watching. I can honestly say I have never watched a whole episode of either Olberman (sp?) or Maddow (sp?). I have seen clips mostly from channel surfing. Edit: After thinking about it for a while, I, as a liberal, find I am more interested in learning about a subject myself instead of hearing what someone else's opinion is. I tend to read more than watch TV or listen to the radio.

Where in the Proclamation does God command the government to do something?

Liberals, by and large, are not necessarily that interested in having their opinions shouted back at them. It just seems silly.

I've read your website and blog. Good stuff.