kapikui

Bush was the most socialistic president we've had up until Obama. Anyone who thinks Bush was a conservative needs to start looking at what conservative actually means.

Sometimes the logic may not be immediately apparent. "The world is about to be destroyed. Build an arc." In retrospect, sure it makes sense, but only because we know how the story turns out. If you're being Noah, how do you get over the thoughts of "Could I just be crazy?" If I received revelation to quit my job and move to Abu Dabi because I would be needed there for something, how would I tell the difference between revelation and some weird idea popping into my head?

I'm not speaking about civil disobedience. Simply the more abstract concept of whether or not the right exists and is being violated in this case. There are places I don't carry now because of legal issues. I allow my right to be violated because it isn't (yet) worth the cost to defend it. That said, I'm not a big fan of civil disobedience in the first place. It has a place, but I tend to follow the "four boxes" theory. Soapbox, advocating for change. Ballot box, voting for change. Jury box, pushing through change via court (jury nullification in particular), and Ammo Box, revolution. I also believe that "...when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security." Where the line is is a discussion for another time, however those who argue for the repeal or infringement upon the second amendment rights would do well to remember that it exists to assure that the people will have the ability to do the above.

Maybe you could provide concrete examples? Because preparing for problems and not walking around in the mistaken belief that someone else will help me should something go wrong is not fear, it's simply being prepared.

There is a VAST difference between arming someone so that they can defend themselves should other measures fail, and having someone go out and be a security guard. In fact that seems to be the major disconnect in this entire discussion. When I carry, I'm not up and around wandering around looking for trouble. In fact I'm trying to avoid it. Most of the time I'm going about my business and completely ignoring my gun. It's never even come out of its holster in any type of confrontation (cleaning and practice are another matter).

That would be your right, however every time concealed carry legislation has come up, the gun grabbers have predicted blood running in the streets. It doesn't happen, in fact the opposite happens. Every single time. When Utah allowed teachers to carry, vast numbers of deaths were predicted. Guess what, It didn't happen, and Utah hasn't had a single school shooting either. You don't want guns in the schools because of what COULD happen. I'm looking at what IS happening and realizing that keeping the good guys from having guns isn't working. I'm also concerned about the dubious idea of keeping guns out of the hands of the "mentally ill". It is absolutely 100% impossible to ever give a government power and not have it abused. The times in recorded history when a government has been given power and has given it back without bloodshed can be counted on one hand. There's an idea. Does the law pass the "Jews in the attic" test. namely, could the law have been used in Nazi Germany to help the government find those hiding Jews in their attics, a la Anne Frank, and destroy them. I would say that tightening up government laws as to what constitutes mental illness fails this test.

Legal right often is different from moral right. While governments often infringe on our personal rights all the time, that doesn't mean the right is existent, only violated. A law that prevents the carrying of weapons on school grounds deprives me of the only reasonable means of defending myself against an armed attacker, and therefore is a grievous violation of my rights.

Depend on the state and what you mean by "apply for a gun" and "registered". Most states actually don't have any form of gun registration. Several, (my state Idaho is one) have constitutional prohibitions on any form of state gun registration or tracking. Any attempt to do so by any agent of the state would become a criminal matter. As far as concealed carry, most states have a 21 year age limit for getting a concealed carry permit, though Vermont, Alaska, Arizona and Wyoming have no requirement for a concealed carry permit. Currently 49 states have some means of allowing concealed carry (not all of those have concealed carry laws, Vermont has no laws addressing concealed carry at all, and in a free society, anything that is not expressly forbidden by law is allowed). The one state (Illinois) that had been banning concealed carry recently had that law struck down by the district court.

Israel has teachers carry, they don't have teachers killing people, and there's almost no school violence there. 99% of the fears and objections are unfounded, and have proven such in areas where such things have been tried. As far as I'm concerned, the "gun free zone" is more of a lunatic protection zone. Teachers who can qualify for a concealed carry license in their state should be able to carry in school. Other private property, public places (malls, businesses etc) should have to post prominently that guns are off limits, and agree that if anyone goes on a killing spree there and someone there says they would have been armed and would have been able to stop the rampage had they been allowed to carry, the owner has to prove that the person couldn't have been able to stop the rampage, or will be held financial liable. I understand that some states have actually passed such laws.

Absolutely. Just as the teacher's right to have an interracial marriage, or be Mormon, or anything similar. Such things are no one else's business. As far as I'm concerned, when I'm carrying, it's no more anyone's business whether or not I have a gun than is my religion, and they have no more moral right to try to stop me from having the means to defend myself than they have to prevent me from worshiping as I please.

The problem is that we are not privy to your situation. We have your description, but that is from your point of view with all of the clouding your emotions give it. That can go two different different directions on that. On the one end, your husband might be right. You might be being oversensitive, and blowing things out of proportion. On the other hand, you might be minimizing the abuse, and things could be far worse than you describe. There's no way for us to know.

No daycares aren't feral factories, public schools are (but that's a rant for a different thread), the day care just gives the public school a jump start, and I did say that some do care, but a lot don't, and even the ones that do burn out rather rapidly. I've seen working daycare kill people. It doesn't matter how much your day care worker cares about the kid if it kills them(the worker, not the kid), you'll still need to find a new daycare, and you get all of the problems then of breaking and forming attachments. If you find a good long term day care, you're very, very lucky. Of course I should have pointed out that I worked in a rather large day care center, not an in home business. If you do HAVE to go with day care that is what I would suggest. Different aged children in a care setting is a good thing. Also be aware that the quality (and cost) of the day care will vary greatly depending on the state laws.

It depends vastly on the day care. There are significant differences in cost. In general from what I've read, you can count on an average of $18,000 per year for child care alone. If you're taking a job to bring in extra money, you also have to take into account that you're likely to have other costs associated with it, including more convenience food and eating out more. This is likely to raise the over all cost significantly more. On another note, I've worked in a daycare. It isn't a good environment for children. The school system rapidly turns kids feral. Day care will turn them feral faster. Most of the children I encountered at that day care who grew up there had severe behavioral and emotional problems. Sometimes you have to put a kid in daycare, but if you can avoid it, stay away. It's bad. Children need someone to bond with. Ideally that should be a parent. When that is not possible, it should be someone with whom the child will have a life long relationship, like a family member or close family friend. Day Care workers are paid crap. They're often people in a first job. Sometimes they're people who can't do anything else. Day cares have a high turn over rate for workers. It's a hard job, so even people who get into it because they want to do it burn out quickly. Heath problems are rampant in the workers, and they often become rapidly unable to do the job. Even people who run day cares themselves often have the business fail. Your child will not have a consistent person being their caregiver. Some kids can do OK with this, others will be devastated every time a worker comes or goes. This could easily (and I believe does, but I have no evidence to prove it) lead to the development of sociopathic disorders.

Well I can think of one thing regarding the sacrament that I was taught as Doctrine, but is actually specifically false, and there is specific scriptural statement to prove its falsehood. I was taught that it is a requirement to use white bread in preparing the sacrament. Given D&C 27, I would say the teaching is wrong. Once when wheat bread was brought, several ward members were rather upset, being of the opinion that unless it was white bread, it didn't count somehow.

Yes.

I spent a year as a substitute teacher. What I saw in the public indoctrination school system was not education. Lip service was paid to the basics, but those were only used to push a far left agenda. They have to be able to read if they're to read leftist and communist propaganda. I will do whatever it takes not to have to send any children I have to the public schools. Even if the education were good, which I don't think it is, the underlying ideology being pushed is vile, and it would be better to have a slightly inferior education, and not expose someone to either the ideology, or the mass of essentially feral people that make up a modern high school.

I tend to agree. The problem with regulating capitalism is that people are in their natural state. That is to say they are the "enemy of god" we are, in general, evil. When allowed to act without oversight capitalists will do vile things to get more money or power. The problem comes in with the fact that the most vile, power hungry people will go to whatever gives them the most of what they want. If you regulate capitalism because "people are evil", which from a certain point of view, they are, you will have the most evil people go to be the regulators, because that's how they can get the most power and money. If I were setting laws regulating capitalism, the only thing I would put in is a law that basically says if a company makes statements that aren't true, or are misleading in any way, the individuals responsible are held to the same standard of truth that a witness in a court of law would. If a salesman lies to make a sale, he has essentially perjured himself. If a commercial lies, anyone involved in the commercial who knew it was false, is guilty of the same offense. Other than that, pretty much everything would be deregulated. Take the BP spill. There were talks about greater regulation on oil drilling. I would remove the regulation. I would just hold companies, and their investors, responsible when something goes seriously wrong. If investors stood to actually have to pay out for a cleanup or something it wouldn't take long before the investors either forced far more stringent regulations than the government ever would, or would bail rapidly and tank the company. Anyone left would then have the option of personally suing those making the decisions for their lost money. The problems that most liberals point out about what they call capitalism is actually from government intervention. Medical care is expensive because of what one has to go through to get anything approved. Gas prices, in the end, are mostly tax. Not just the tax the state charges you, but the tax the government applies to the oil companies at all levels, from buying or selling crude oil, exchanging the refined products, vast insurance policies required by the government, taxes paid on things they buy, employers portion of payroll tax, social security, unemployment, property taxes, and any number of other taxes. Companies don't pay taxes, you do. They give the money to the government, and then raise prices to compensate. If they can't raise prices enough, they pay employees less, cut benefits, hire fewer people, or whatever else they have to do.

The issue you describe while you are sleeping is something I've had before. I was sure I was being tormented. Long story short, I was brought around via some very circuitous research to the idea that I might not be getting enough air while sleeping. I tried Breathe Right nasal strips (the off brands work just as well and are cheaper), and the problem went away. If I go for more than a night without a breathe right, the nightmares return. My parents both have CPAP machines for sleep apnea, they provide forced air to help them breathe at night. This is not to say that Satan isn't tormenting you, because the others are right. He wants you to be unhappy. I would suggest trying the nasal strips as an experiment. It may help.

You know, some times it doesn't matter what YOU want. I wanted to have a load of children, my wife (before we got married) was hesitant, but now has come around. There's just one problem. We have been actively trying for three years. No kids yet. My count isn't high enough, and she seems to have difficulties as well. Whatever you want, be prepared to change your mind.

As a conservative, I would agree with you. Helping is good, and we all should help. The problem is that those who call themselves liberals right now seem to feel that they have the right and the authority to dictate to me that I should help, how much I should help, and who I should help, and jail me if I don't do it. In my opinion, this is not in accordance with the principle of free agency. I would also argue that government programs are most certainly NOT more efficient. In most states the welfare system is so inefficient that if it were a charity, and had that much overhead, the people running it would, by codified state law, be jailed for running a scam, because they don't give a high enough percentage of the money taken in to those they claim to help. There is also a problem with what constitutes "help" we live in such an entitlement state right now that people are becoming dependent on it instead of going out and standing on their own. Our heavenly father doesn't just give us things to "help" us because it would not teach us how to become perfected beings. Some help is good. I've met far too many mult-generational professional welfare recipients, who considered a lifetime living on welfare to be a valid life choice to ever believe that the U.S. welfare system is a good thing.

See, the truth is that you're the only real person on the site. Everyone else is just a sockpuppet for one guy sitting in his basement who has way too much time on his hands. At least as far as you know.

The difference is that it's their money. They're doing everything they can to minimize the amount the government robs from them (and make no mistake, taxes are nothing short of robbery by the government). Welfare abusers are not working or producing anything. They are providing no jobs to others. The "greedy" business owners want to make more money for themselves. If you are running a business, you don't make more money by playing Scrooge McDuck and putting it all in a money bin. You take all of it that you can and expand your business. You hire more people to do the work, and you pay them. They then turn around and spend that money, and enrich other "greedy" people who turn around and take that money and do the same thing.

I remember seeing some national geographic-esque program a while back. I think it was about "cargo cults" present on south pacific islands, but that's not really relevant. It was a rather primitive culture like you see in a lot of documentaries, where everyone is naked or nearly naked, and the only technology you find is what the camera crew brings. They were celebrating the birthday of the oldest woman ever in the history of their tribe (of course oral history only, as there was no written language). She looked to be about 80. It turns out she had just turned 30. If your society is one when you're likely to be dead by the time you're 25, you tend to start a little earlier. While OUR modern society figures on 18, we live in a far more complex society. People in our society have the luxury of being immature until 18 and beyond. Anyone in that society that was immature beyond about 10, probably didn't live long enough to make reproduction a concern anyway. We are designed to maximize the survival of our species. We were commanded to multiply and replenish the earth. That is the one commandment that we are programmed to follow. It takes a conscious effort not to follow that one, and even then most people who would want to can't do it, at least not long term, and not without technological assistance. Women start at the age that they do, because that is the best time to start under the worst of circumstances. If it were later, most of the human race would have died out because there is no genealogical line that hasn't gone through such types of problems.

You know. The carseat is a relatively recent invention. While it might help in an accident, in truth they most likely only help a little bit. Laws mandating use are more about making people FEEL better about it, not really about actually helping. Anyone over 35 right now most likely didn't grow up using a car seat, and many didn't grow up with using seatbelts either. We all made it out alive. Your kids most likely will survive a few weeks of vacationing. I can't speak for how things are in Bejing, but in a lot of places I'd be more worried about the food and the water than I would be about the car seats.

Ok, here's my take on the whole thing. The United States, and the rest of the world are headed for economic disaster, and we're doing all the wrong things to avoid it. Many of the things people are trying to do are for good and righteous reasons, or at least the stated reasons are good and righteous, but the outcome is anything but. We have started to create a welfare state. People now expect the government to bail them out no matter what happens. The U.S. is a bit behind the curve on this, but let's look at Greece. They have a government program to essentially protect people from any poor choice they make. You can pretty much do whatever you want, and as long as you commit no crime, you can still live pretty well, at least that was how they tried to do things. Now they can't do it. The money isn't there. The problem is that many of the people there have no other means of supporting themselves but to live off of the government, and they like those government protections. The problem is that there is no money to do it. They're borrowing from other countries to prop up their own, but those other countries have some of the same somewhat Socialistic policies, and are having trouble keeping those programs running in their own countries, and can't support Greece. Thus we get the austerity measures. Many Greeks are angry, and are rioting over it. Now the financial problems are leading to civil problems, and that leads to more money spent, just to contain the civil unrest, and even less money can be spent on social type programs, causing more civil unrest. The problem is twofold. First, we've raised a generation that's scared to death of hard work. How do I know? I'm one of them. I have an underlying feeling that I'm owed a living by someone, and I shouldn't have to do anything significant for it. I know intellectually and spiritually that this is an evil idea, but a large part of me still wants it, and gets angry when I don't get it. The second is that we are in many ways too generous. The generosity does bad things, first it creates the aforementioned generation that's scared to death of hard work. If you keep giving someone something without their having to work for it, often they will consider such a thing to be a right. At that point, you can't take it away without violence, as we're seeing in Greece. The second is that we can only be so generous. From King Benjamin's address Note that last verse there. It is not requisite that a man should run faster than he has strength. Unless the budget of the United States is cut by a gargantuan amount, we WILL see an economic collapse, and we will see it soon. I don't have a time table, we could limp along for a long while, but without either a major change in the way we do things, or a miracle, we're going to have a collapse. Not just a double dip recession, but a complete collapse. Things are going to get very bad. On the other hand, if we try to make the changes, things are going to get very bad. People are already either dependent on the government financially, or emotionally dependent on the feeling of security the government programs provide. An attempt to cut them far enough that we can even service our own debt would likely result in riots and violence. The question now is what to do about it. While it is tempting to say, "Let's fix these societal problems," the underlying problem is one of attitude, and it may even be an acceptable idea to try and convince others to follow to change their attitudes too. The thing is that the only real effective means of stopping the disaster isn't to prevent it from happening, because that is most likely beyond your capabilities. The answer is to place yourself in a situation that such a problem will have minimal effect on you. This means having a money surplus, food storage, water storage, auxiliary power generation methods, means of food production, self defense and whatever else you can do. The other thing to consider is that even if the monetary system doesn't collapse, chances are very good that you personally have a financial catastrophe at least once in your life (I've had several), and having such things prepared will be to your benefit.