kapikui

Vort, I like about 90% of what you say, I seriously missed you when you took your hiatus a while ago and stopped coming around myself since you're one of the few people around here who talks sense, but you really, REALLY have no idea what you are talking about in this instance. I was going to say more, but it's late, and I really don't want to get myself worked up. Let's just say I've spent about 30 years doing personal scientific experiments on how I best do things depending on how much of what kind of medication I am on, and have found things that work for me. You might want to read some actual research on the subject.

You don't know me, you don't know yow my brain works. I've spent over 40 years dealing with it. You haven't, so don't presume to lecture. Now even if you were right however, the point still stands that as long as I am not actively disruptive, IE blocking vision vision or making noise, it's no one else's business whether or not I am paying attention, or what I am paying attention to. I find the entire attitude that has been exhibited in this thread being basically "We need to force everyone to pay attention in a certain way" to be extremely distasteful, and were I to find that to be the prevailing attitude in my ward(a ward I've been in since 1973), I wouldn't be back, not to that ward. It all kind of reminds me of the primary child who considers himself the prayer police and peeks around during prayer to make sure that everyone else has their eyes closed and their arms folded and heads bowed. It is an equally childish attitude. I'm finding that as I age, I am less and less able to tolerate busybodies, to the point that the best I can do when I absolutely need to is active avoidance, though my self control in this is slipping.

I actually listen better when I'm doing something slightly distracting. Reading is bad since processing the language of the text interferes with processing the language of the talking. A good game of 2048 is nice for a concentration enhancer since I can process all of the talk. If I don't have a distraction, I'll hear a bit, and be off on some long chain of thoughts. Now if my doing something on a tablet that is making no noise is distracting to you, it's you with the problem. I'm not preventing you from hearing anything, and I'm doing things to help me listen. For that matter, as long as I'm not being specifically disruptive, it's absolutely none of your business if I'm paying attention or not.

I'm finding 31% of births being medicaid funded to be abhorrent. The fact that it's one of the lowest in the nation nauseating.

I didn't see anything that should have pushed him away.

I wouldn't worry too much about getting emotional during a funeral of a loved one. It's expected and normal. It's kind of what funerals are for. More problematic is when someone gets emotional and starts blubbering in a standard sacrament meeting talk. That would be a bit different.

Yet most wives tend to spend a considerable amount of time trying to train or "fix" their husbands.

My father has managed to bore himself to sleep.

Ya know. Although I've never actually watched a superbowl, when I was young, I can remember people always being disappointed because the superbowl was never that good of a game. A lot of people turned off well before the end. Now that there are billions of dollars invested the game always seems to be a lot closer and more interesting, and always a pull it out at the last story. It is important that people watch all the way to the end. Now I wouldn't say it's rigged, or rather I wouldn't say that the outcome is determined ahead of time, but there is a vast financial incentive to make sure that those watching remain interested all the way to the end and not get bored and tune away and miss the ads that someone paid $183,000 per second to air, and millions more to make. Do you think those advertisers would pay that much if they knew that people would be tuning away sometime in the third quarter? Doubtful. By all means enjoy the show, but don't think that it's much more real than wrestling.

Just leaving this here.

Also as aside, you and your husband should visit a clinic and get tested.

Actually attempted suicide rate in Utah is one of the lowest. It's just that Utah has an insanely high successful suicide rate, which speaks to method, not motive.

Seems like that would be the reason to do it MORE. Once it no longer embarrasses them it would cease to be fun.

It also makes the lightning rod look prettier.

I can't say why, but if someone's identity is that fragile, maybe they deserve it to be invalidated.

And why does something that happened in China alter the enumerated powers in a legal document governing the United States. It may indeed be better to have a federal ban. If that is the case, get an amendment passed that empowers the federal government to do so. As it stands, the power that the federal government is using is illegitimate.

What a lot of people seem to think is that not legalizing marijuana means we have to keep enforcing bans in the way that we have, including confiscating ALL of someone's property because a small amount of marijuana was found inside a tenant's room. Yes, the court ordered that the property be restored (7 years later and after it had been sold), but it was too late. A conviction wasn't even needed as the law (as upheld by some moronic courts) specified that property seizure could happen before conviction because it was wrong that someone who obtained money through selling drugs then be allowed to use that money. Of course many departments are now using for revenue enhancement, and a few have even reportedly been accused of planting evidence so that they can get lucrative properties. I would also argue strongly that the bans need to be at the state level since I can see no possible constitutional authority for a blanket federal ban on any particular substance. After all during prohibition the people of the United States decided that alcohol should be banned. In order to accomplish that a constitutional amendment was needed. Why then is it now permissible for an unelected DEA or FDA bureaucrat to decide whether or not someone should face federal prison for a particular substance? The federal government has the authority to say that substance X may not cross state lines for the purpose of sale. That's it. That is the full extent of the power to regulate such ceded by the people to the federal government in the constitution. Anything more is overreach. Now I'm a large proponent of keeping the drugs that are currently illegal, illegal within the borders of my state. What your state does is its business, but the federal government badly needs to keep to its original charter and power granted by that charter.

The problem is that "myself" generally hates people (at least in person), and particularly associating with people.

There are several schools of thought about video game emulation and old school software. There are also several classifications. The Supreme Court has ruled that it is okay to make copies of or use copies of media you already own. It is not piracy. Many companies will protect their copyright on old games. Many will encourage you to download and play old games and don't care if you bought them. Other companies know that they're available and turn a blind eye to it. Obviously if you only game you may play it on whatever platform you wish some companies have fought this but they have lost. If the company says you may play their intellectual property, it's not piracy, they've said you can do it. If they are willingly turning a blind eye to it, it would be a moral and legal gray area. Finally if they say "no you may not use our intellectual property in that manner" it would be morally ethically and legally wrong. Some people like to make this a complicated subject, but it really is that simple.

First off, I hate Trump, and will not vote for him. Well, after viewing the video, I'm not convinced 100% that it is legitimate. There are suspicious glitches in the video. The video and audio were clearly not recorded at the same time since we have what looks like cell phone or cheap video camera footage of a bus with trump getting off of it, and audio from inside the bus. Now it isn't hard to go back and sync audio and video, but unless the recording was done deliberately at the time, It would have taken some significant effort to get a hot mike recording, and sync it up with something that seems to be poor video of trump and friends getting off of a bus and meeting with some random woman, and walking. All of the disgusting comments take place when Trump is on the bus and we can't tell other than by voice if it is indeed him speaking. That said, I've never made any secret that I don't think Trump is in this to win. He is in it to do as much damage to the Republican party as possible. He wants to give the presidency and both houses of congress to the democrats and get favors from a sitting president that he wouldn't be able to use or do if HE were president. Hillary was falling in her numbers again. Every time that happens, Trump does or says something to destroy his chances. This is no different.

And pretty much only in US. Any 3rd world place with rolling blackouts will have candles for lighting during power outages.

1. There's still print porn? Why? 2. It's almost always best to mind your own business and not judge those who MAY be sinning differently than you. You don't even know for sure that they were. 3. It was in the master closet. That sounds like storage not hiding, at least not from a spouse. Maybe the kids.

Honestly,on your first couple of runs through (unless you really happen to like Isaiah), I would suggest skipping any chapter that has "Compare Isaiah xx" in the chapter heading. There's a whole lot of good stuff in there, but it's dense, and can be difficult to understand, and Nephi's going on about how simple it is just makes me want to go back in time and hurt him. After you've read the Book of Mormon enough that you know how everything's going to go ahead of time, the included chapters of Isaiah become much easier to understand, at least in the desired context. Likewise skimming 3 Nephi after chapter 12 or so is probably ok on your first run. It's a lot simpler, but it's also nearly direct quotes from Christ's sermons in the old world as (Spoilers) it's Christ visiting the Nephites and teaching them what he taught in Israel. Again a lot of good stuff, but likely stuff you already know, and less helpful for the overview that you're going to want for the first time.

It was a paraglider actually. It crashed through the roof of the chapel in Draper. Apparently the meeting was just about to start. The pilot was killed. http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865660683/Paraglider-killed-after-crashing-into-LDS-church-building.html?pg=all

A businessman an artist and an engineer were discussing marital fidelity and whether or not it was acceptable for a man to have a mistress. Thr businessman argued that it was never proper. The artist said that it was probably wrong, but if he absolutely needed it as a man he should at least have the decency to allow his wife to remain in blissful ignorance. The engineer said that not only should a man have a wife and a mistress, but they should know about each other. That way he can tell his wife that he's with his mistress and his mistress that he's with his wife and then he can go to the lab and get some work done. The same might be said for video games, sporting events, hunting, fishing etc.