Blackmarch

if its a gov school then yes, she could do that justifiably. otherwise no. whether one would want to as an LDS member on the other hand i don't know ( I wouldn't).

me too it's been too long.

can i donate my brother's dog?

TY! the interwebs has left my ipad behind so i can't do much more than look at the site now most of the time.

I'm in agreement with mirk on this one.

Chicken cheese, cheese, and more cheese onions ham bacon tomatoes pineapple drippings barbecue sauce or alfredo sauce green peppers, red peppers bits of olive, very sparse.. or some olive oil drippings. black pepper edit: and mushrooms. totally forgot the shrooms lol.

i've known people who made that decision where it was either the job or losing the home... and having made the sacrifice, things happened; the dad got a raise, people who had extra food would just happen to stop by and ask if they wanted the extras, people at work needed someone to fill in so dad was able to get those, all sorts of things which can have a monetary value attached to it.

apple is going down the sink. have been ever since they came out of the closet. altho applestuff tends to be simplistic and fairly easy to use compared to platforms. however just recently there was an apple device that spontaneously combusted so they might have stolen samsungs patent this time around.

I alternate between an electric razor and a bic cheap throwaway razor depending how long the hair is (if it's short i use the electric razor, otherwise the the cheap throwaway one). my shaving cream is hot water (soak and scrub your bearded area with water as hot so that you can barely stand it) and i don't use after shave. and I shave about every other day. i don't throw away the blade until i start getting more than one nick fairly regularly. shave with the grain. going against makes too many problems. Ditching shaving cream was one of the better tidbits of advice i've randomly come across. saves you a penny or two too. altho shaving cream is useful for when you go camping.

maybe if you're that person's bishop and you've gotten the revelation to do so.. or if you're the parent of said person. i agree with person 0's order for the most part, however I think that if it came down to the line and employer and church were absolutely 100% incompatible that a person would be blessed for choosing God's job over the world's job.

that's too much pineapple in one spot...... however having some pineapple drippings drizzled over a ham pizza is excellent.

they are people who are in direct service to their master. demons would be spirit people who serve satan and his desires they will never have a chance to be born to this world and thus never get a physical body. angels are those who are in direct service to God and Christ. however with angels, they can be spirits who will yet be born to this world, they can be spirits who have been born to this world but have not been resurrected yet, or they can also be beings of both of physical and spirit body. I wouldn't say that they church itself believes in guardian angels in the sense that that is an actual job for an angel... butthey do believe that angels can and do intervene in the affairs of people for good, as well as that the term gaurdian angel is used a lot (so you could say it is traditionally believed by quite a few).

it has the authority to act in the name of christ. as an organization it has to be able to maintain it's standards in some way or another and there must needs be a way to handle people who remain disobedient after request to change. as it is not the government the most physical thing that they can do is seperate an individual from the rest of the church to varying degrees up to total seperation (ie excommunication)- this protects both parties. (and in a sense that's what sin does to us spiritually in regards to god) and gives time to an individual to repent.

here is the litmus test I use: What do you do with it? If you want to take an item from a store without paying for it, are you guilty of sin of theft? have you lost your temple worthiness? if you can restrain yourself in those sort of urges so that you don't commit sin then you are fine. I would hope a person would be honest with themselves and to their leaders so that they don't get put into a position that would potentially compromise them or put them into temptation. As for the lgbtq community as a quasi political entity itself, no it will continue on the path to damnation.

he is also has a duty to protect the church.

unfortunately the courts decision was ultimately to pass the hot potato on to the next case.... which looks like it will be him, again. the only thing they ruled against was that the accusers used the courts maliciously. they didn't touch rights at all.

is it private or publicly funded. if private I agree... but if public then it has to be in line with that which is a can o worms.

like i say. protests are half a step away from mobocracy.

best of luck to him. self abuse to stop abuse doesn't make much sense to me. While i think that having a counselor in the interview room would be a really good idea (law of witnesses)... beyond that not much tho.

if everyone else wasn't doing their darndest to be worse than him.... I don't listen to what the guy says or tweets, but it does pay to watch what he signs off on. and that has been impressive. I'm just hoping he doesn't have to go under oath otherwise i think his mouth will sink him.

he still got down and dirty in politics and did some really underhanded things. so i'm glad he's out of them... altho more than likely the replacement isn't going to be better.

it's not as bad as some of the things commited by the church and popes in the past. second as to whether the pope knew or not i'd wait until there is more than just allegation. Smearing the purity of something or someone especially in regards to sexuality is an old tactic.

I'm very sorry for them. however considering how society is towards christianity i'm going to wait before making any judgements.

well considering he was fired by trump for whatever reason prior to that it's not a huge stretch of imagination to to say that there's bad blood between them.. and if so it wouldn't take much for him to attempt to smear trump. words are cheap. i'd like to see some good evidence.

i'd argue its used more as that was a term applied by critics and dissenters way back in the day which then got adopted by the public- and that is what the public identifies us as... and it's easier to go with the public than it is to change the public. on a technical side it would be like going around calling christians paulians or peterans.