Praetorian_Brow

Rely on yourself then when you are getting conflicting orders because in the end, its your actions that will define the outcome and you will face the consequences. Evidently you have the capacity to understand that such a situation could happen and you asked the question, which infers that you know the answer, but fear it. Doctrine is fluid, as is truth and so are the people who tell us the doctrine, but that doesn't mean we should ignore, just weigh the scales of ethical morality in our own mind. The Nuremburg trials defined to the world that "following orders" was not a good defence when faced with moral and ethical dilemmas. I wonder if Jesus would even attend a LDS service, given that we are so smug about having the "truth", as I am sure some of our doctrine/understanding would be immediately questioned.

Russian economy in trouble Reading that, I had flashbacks as to why Japan attacked the U.S. after the embargoes were put in place. This situation with Russia is escalating too fast.

Documentary on Putin I didn't realize it was that bad, wow. Be very afraid of Russia.

Only I have access to the Emperor, so technically, I have all the power and I won't let you have any.

This is about Black Sea control and Russia influencing the Ukraine away from the West. There is a dual Russian/Ukrainian Naval base within the Ukraine that I am sure annoys Russia and has already been occupied by Russian forces, essentially an invasion, much like what happened in Georgia. Putin sees an opportunity, as did does the ousted ex-president of the Ukraine who is pro Russia and who did an about face in accepting Russian assurances over European assurances. It doesn't take much imagination that the ex president and Putin's interests coincide. It should be a war, as say if Canada was to flood Alaska (its really ours) with troops with no identification but using Canadian army equipment, occupy towns and villages and say it wasn't us, influence a "referendum" to join Canada, then I am sure the U.S. would definitely be angry enough to send Bieber back.

Economics is trust and if I don't know what you own or what I own, how can I trust that my money is actually what I thought it was. That is the problem with debt. Multiply that by trillions, then the foundation of who owes who becomes a question of fear once an institution collapses. Supposedly, banks are backed by governments, but its a pretty silly notion, considering that if the banks go, so does government. I had a conversation with a friend a month or so ago and he was telling me how secure digital currency was and he got irritated with me when I laughed and said no currency is safe from fraud. A few weeks later, guess what, fraud and debt. Bonds, stocks, insurance, leverage, currency, dividends, consolidated debt, the latest idea from the stock exchanges in how to trade magic beans, is still all trust.

Economic freedom is an oxymoron as the former speaks of disparity through gain and the latter implies an environment for self will and if religion is added to that, it becomes a gainful self willed justification of divine right. Just like everything, including political models, theories or suggestions in practice, moderation is best. I agree that debt is the lurking evil that will trump any other arguments when it decides to call in what its owed, but if everyone believes economic freedom is viable, why are we surprised when we all can't have nice things with the irony being that a large percentage of the people with the nice things are calling the shots, but are living life larger than they should, while proclaiming economic freedom for all.

The problem within our religious culture is that to confess about a sin of this nature implies the person is out of control and immediately considered and addict and therefore treated as suspect, which then feeds into the cycle of a person is afraid to come clean, simply because they know they will be shunned. The shunning does far more harm than good, even if there is some kind of poetic justice involved. Outside of our religiously enforced abstinence, pornography use is not considered a major problem immediately when mentioned, simply because there is not a culture of public shaming, self loathing or a feeling of failure. It of course depends on the severity of the problem and its nature, but in the end, making the connection between crack use and someone being afraid to confess to pornography is too much of a stretch as white washing confessions as addictions with the adage that they and the people are all similar is silly. Our social context for perfection, while a notable goal, seems to do a lot of harm for those people seeking to be accepted for who they are and gain social support for their unease. Tough on crime approach seems to make far more criminals than deterring them.

Most people don't understand freedom until someone else tells them they aren't free. Is it truly freedom to wage economic domination, or is it simply something disguised as such to justify any misgivings. Illusion of choice is freedom in some respects, as is voting, but in the end, most people want predictability. Someone invading me or preaching freedom to me in most cases, have a different agenda other than what they speak of.

Elders quorum is very close to what the video illustrated it was. When I get bored in a class, I ask a question in my smooth diplomatic way that ignites debate or observations and most of the time, the teacher is grateful that I do, as reading the manual for everyone is boring as is the cliche answers. Ask some questions! Be prepared for the usual retorts though, as inevitable someone infers that my faith is lacking and that is all that is required, but usually I am rewarded with some surprisings gems as I realize that others are thinking similar to me. Participate!

I had no intention of sparking anything or defaming someones character. It was an observation that occurred to me but I suppose this thread is an obvious illustration of the original poster's intent and how quickly threads can lose context. I honestly don't think a consensus or spirit of total cooperation can be attained on a forum though, as its very purpose is to foster debate and examine issues, which leads to a protracted opinionated war of attrition for those who believe they have a vested interest. Of course, we should maintain civility and my sarcasm and dead pan humour does not communicate well, but even I can allow the satisfaction of someone having the last word.

https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/233432.pdf The study by the Justice Department that is linked above makes the case that Tasers when used "properly" are safe. However, the study notes that high stress, environmental factors can lead to a cascade effect, that can lead to injury, which is ironic considering that when won't a Taser be used in a stressful situation. Falling, landing hard, that sort of thing. As the darts are 9mm, they can perforate skin as designed, but if they hit vital exposed areas such as throat or eyes, then the injury could be lethal. I would prefer law enforcement to use tasers before guns and appreciate they have an alternative that is less lethal, however reports seem to encourage the idea that officers are far too quick to deploy tasers simply out of convenience. Escalation of suitable force needs to be paramount, but as always, it usually comes down to the officer's training and ability to de-escalate the situation. Abuse of tasers can dramatically increase the possibility of death, as the study notes. Continuous shocking or multiple hits outside the guidelines can happen. Either way, I consider them an improvement over firearms, but they do need to be considered one of the last methods when all less dangerous options have been exhausted.

Joke or not, mentioning a taser online to inspire fear makes me wonder what you are like on the job.

I think I was 4 or 5 when I realized they gave out packs of gum into those advertising envelopes. Eat my pack and decided that I wanted more, so I went down the street committing mail theft. I didn't see it as theft, just solving a problem I had.

Some conditions are incurable and its unrealistic to expect otherwise as that puts dangerous assumptions in place.

Maybe its some social equilibrium at play, when people criticize the cultural aspects of Utah. It seems to me that anyone outside Utah is expected to have some kind of awe for the state, because that is where we are told the Saints are and then its reinforced by the stereotypes that anything outside Utah is a mission. My brother served in the bishopric here a few times, served a mission in Ukraine when they just opened the mission, then when he moved to Utah and they asked for his church resume, he was told, "Oh, that was the mission field, this is different." Ahaha. The atmosphere of the state and most of its citizens, just seemed so cliche to me, as if the cliche was more important than living life as it was. However, as always, there are exceptions and variables that most won't accept or dismiss. If you look for the negatives, you will find them, sure, but as a Canadian, I was startled when I went to Utah and my expectations of finding Mecca and pleasant people was shattered, then again, I am not that friendly of a person anyway. I spent about a whole day touring Temple Square and the most friendly person I met, was Ray the homeless guy. Everyone else seemed like...oil on water. I miss the mountains though, but not the crazy drivers or the crazy roads. As if traffic lights telling you to move onto oncoming traffic to merge is safe.

Oh, I don't disagree that most votes against are spoken privately, but what is the purpose of asking for votes against publicly when its already culturally decided that a vote is only good in private? The wrath I speak of is public opinion and backroom speculation/gossip or the unspoken but remembered moment when a person dared to stand against the might of the church and all its congregation. People remember such things and do doubt would hesitate to extend the same invitations as they once did. Plus, the person who voted against will probably have speculation thrown at them as to why, which leads to more questions.

Sustaining is an ongoing effort as we recognize their authority to speak on our behalf. The initial sustaining with everyone in the congregation seems a bit odd, considering its more of a customary tradition that seems to be used only for unity sake. There are rare instances of someone voting against, but I wonder what the effect actually is, other than a cursory consultation. In a culture that decries public shaming and seems to have an aggressive policy of enforced unity, it seems a strange thing indeed that a person would have to face public condemnation and ostracization if they did actually exercise their vote in a negative. Then again, does the vote actually mean anything, considering the person being voted for would have very little consequences if they were discovered, other than them unlikely being denied a calling that was extended to them by God, based on our interpretations. In the end the person who voted against would have to face the wrath of every member of the church regardless of whether they had valid concerns.

I don't believe everything that leaders say is straight from God, nor is it direct revelation. I would hazard a guess that the majority of what is told to us is a culmination of life experience, wisdom, advice sprinkled with a finite amount of inspiration. Leaders do get it wrong and it amazes me that some refuse to believe that.

Since I have been in the dating world and listened to women speak of men, I have realized that women in general can be far more vicious and cruel than men on a comparative scale. As noted already, in general men are more willing resort to physical violence, but I rarely hear instances of a man waging a social campaign to ostracize and defame a woman for the rest of her life. It is also a bit funny to me that the same women who complain that there are no more men (as if their idea of a man is what a man is) belittle men for failing them in some regard. It seems strange to me that the women I know, expect to be chased, to be pandered, to be served, but act as if they will only return the effort once their whims have been satisfied, which seems to be never Its understood that men don't communicate the same as women, but I always thought it odd that women don't seem all that keen on attempting to communicate how a male does, but complain that he doesn't communicate well while he is busy apologizing for not remembering that she wanted that shade of off-white fuscia neon orange for her nails. I went to a dance once and we were sitting in a circle talking preferences in the other gender and I said hair is usually a good indicator of a woman's personality. Immediately, every single women there started to defend their hair, as if my comments were directed intentionally at them. The men just sat there and were and content to not believe it was all about them. There is an increasing and rapid divide between men and women succeeding in school, which seems to be at pace with social norms and I am not all that surprised.

My peacock feathers are still larger and brighter than anyone else's, too bad I am not interesting in playing the game she expects. I once sat among about 20 LDS who were women complaining about relationships and since I was the ambassador for the men, I thought it was necessary to point out that regardless of the social context or times, it was much the same between humans and animals when seeking a relationship of some kind. Posturing, displaying, demonstrating, all for a purpose. A few of the women objected to my point by stating they were daughters of God and didn't believe that and I had a hard time hiding my amusement as they tried to distance themselves from something so integral to life simply out of some trained morale compass. Regardless of a changing moral compass at the root of motives, there seems to be an inherent cost benefit analysis to most life goals. Marriage is an investment, with benefits, thats why it is desireable, as is sex. If that wasn't so, no one would want them to happen. Naturally, someone will have the audacity to point out exceptions, such as the idealist polygamy perspective or eternal marriage simply as demonstrating obedience. Since prostitution is the oldest trade, why be surprised that marriage or the road to marriage is any different? Speak of selfless service all you want, but it is extremely rare and unlikely, as even becoming selfless requires a certain road of selfish behaviour, then again, is it not selfish to want your spouse to be the most comfortable or happy, simply because that is what is best for the relationship or even to make the nagging disappear?

You want concrete evidence for a story that may or may not be a religious plagiarism that is based on faith? Independence is not possible without some degree of rebellion.

I can't help picturing gum being offered.

Good on you, maybe this will make some people stop washing their hands of it and stop saying its "that genders" problem. Both genders have problems with its many forms.

Always interesting to see who gets defensive on these type of concerns. Ever since I got a cellphone, I got more stupid. I don't memorize numbers like I used, I don't plan ahead like I used to and I am worse at directions. The phone rings, I have some strange impulse to answer it, regardless of what I am doing. I also got lazy and starting texting, rather than calling people. I got a cellphone after highschool and depend on it far too much and thought of discarding it. I can't imagine the irrational dependency people who grew up with them have. I hear reports of anxious people at the MTC because its the first time in their lives, they haven't always had a cellphone. Imagine never being disconnected, ever. No wonder some people feel entitled and impatient when they are used to getting what they want, now. I think the points that cellphones are essential are hilarious, given that for thousands of years, we survived without them. Sure, its convenient to have aps, internet, camera, music in one package, as well as a stalker parenting ap, but man, how sad is it when the cellphone towers stop working because of loss of power. Its amazing and sad. My kids won't have cellphones until later teenage life, but most likely, she will want them to have them, so I will lose. There is freedom in independence.