• Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by paracaidista508

  1. 3 minutes ago, Fether said:

    Well what is the bar?

    You can’t go on a mission if you ever committed a sexual sin? Or you can’t go on a mission if you haven’t repented of commiting a sexual sin?

    I have no idea....all that's been said is it has been raised...I figured I would roll with a common sin that is pretty bad and apparently it is still ok to fornicate...just repent and you are good. That was a requirement then too, but you could "resolve" it in a few weeks.  Im thinking nothing has really changed other than a timeline.

    They still send kids who did whatever prior to mission

    They still send kids who openly don't want to go, but with a cattle prod go anyway so what has changed?

    As for the balance who are excited to go and there are many...well they go and do their thing

  2. 6 minutes ago, CV75 said:

    Actually, it's not being able to go at all if you read the directions. The guidance is that long-term or repeated sexual relationships disqualify a young person from going. the guy who stole the virginity of several of the girls in the stake... I guess if you are a roving player its ok, but if its just one girl then we have a problem with that??

  3. 20 minutes ago, Vort said:

    Yes, you are wrong. That much I'm sure of.

    I am not an authority, but my understanding is that having a child (i.e. being a parent), being party to an elective abortion, forcible rape, and engaging in homosexual activity are permanent exclusions to missionary service. Fornication per se is certainly a grievous sin, but afaik a repentant fornicator who does not fall into one of the previously listed categories can still serve a full-time mission.

    hmm ok then so the bar wasn't raised I guess

  4. 27 minutes ago, Vort said:

    Disclaimer: I am not a military man. My father was an enlisted man, but he never really talked about it. I didn't even find out until his funeral that he was a sergeant (NCO). So what I know is what I've gleaned from talking with military friends and occasional reading. Don't believe anything I write without checking it against some unimpeachable source, like Wikipedia or the guy next door.

    A man (or, today, a woman) can sign up or enlist in the military, for which they have historically received some (minimal) pay and some (minimal) living situation, aka room and board. The enlistment was normally for some limited time period, sort of an indentured servitude. Literally almost any able-bodied man could enlist, regardless of criminal history or nationality. Of course, having enlisted, the man was at the mercy of the merciless military, to do their bidding or be hanged as a traitor. In times of need, young men and boys could be drafted (compelled), or even impressed (kidnapped), into enlisted military service.

    The officers are a different matter. You don't draft an officer. Historically, these were professional soldiers, military-minded men who chose the military as a career*. In order to be an officer, a man must have been recommended by some important, influential figure as a sponsor. In medieval times, such influential men would commission fighting men, outfitting them with weapons and armor (an expensive proposition) and giving them an objective. There was usually a reward offered as compensation for achieving the objective, not to mention the ageless practice of despoiling the conquered. Clever, ruthless military men could and did become fabulously wealthy from such conquests.

    *It was common in seventeenth- to nineteenth-century Europe for military commissions to be treated as chattel, offered as favors or even auctioned off. Thus, for example, if an English man wanted to be a "gentleman" -- a member of high society -- and was not born into such a position or didn't have the inherited means to hold onto it, his options were very limited. He might possibly find a way to become a clergyman, which position was considered a gentleman. If he was very rich, he might make a large contribution to the king or other nobility in an effort to buy a title. Otherwise, his best hope was to find a way to purchase a military commission. If he survived (both literally and socially) the experience, he could retire from the military as a bona fide gentleman, and possibly with a lot of money, depending on his fortunes of war.

    In the US today, the commission is usually sponsored by a senator, who only rarely personally knows the individuals s/he sponsors. Military recruiters sign young people up, and the weeding-out process begins.

    Not all officers are commissioned. Among the enlisted men, there are non-commissioned officers, or NCOs. These are enlisted men with a lot of experience who are put in charge of less experienced men. In the US Army (and Air Force?), these are the corporals and sergeants. I believe the Navy calls their NCOs petty officers. There is also another class of officer that lacks a commission, called a warrant officer. These are typically specialists in some technical area, such as IT. In the US, warrant officers are paid and more or less treated on par with commissioned officers. (I believe it's also the case that chief warrant officers are commissioned by the President.)

    Also, note that the Marines are a different show. They call their positions differently from both Army and Navy, and if I understand correctly, they draw all of their officers from the enlisted ranks -- which is yet another reason the Marines consider themselves physically and morally superior to all other military units. That certainly appeals to my ideas of fair play and equality, but I imagine it introduces a whole new set of headaches.

    And this folks is among the many reasons military service is discouraged by many...not just lds folks. This info here was valid to some degree up to maybe ww1. After that it is a different ballgame. I can elaborate if you wish, but todays military (Post Vietnam era) is wildly different than your description here. 

  5. 1 hour ago, The Folk Prophet said:

    Someone higher up the chain than me might have to answer that.

    But I doubt it. Seriously, highly doubt it.

    So the standard really hasn't changed then except for perhaps the timeline. When I was that age they could have sex / girlfriend and go a few weeks later...Now its a few months maybe. Well that is not a higher bar.

  6. One of the best zone leaders I ever had was hated in his stake because he had took the virginity of many of the young women. He too did amazing things on his mission and was an amazing leader that taught me so much about what a good missionary is.

    Another great missionary that exhibited more love than  could ever hope for grew up in Vegas, had a tattoo on his thigh and was huge into partying before his mission. He was and is one of the most kind and bold people I know. True liver of charity.

    I could probably think of more examples if I thought hard enough, but I won’t.




    And nowadays with the raised bar, At least two of those missionaries would never be allowed to serve a mission no matter what. I may be wrong though.

  7. 50 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

     So... this boils down to... People don't go on missions because they don't want to or don't qualify. 

    Well... yeah. 

    The question is why don't they want to? Why are they unwilling to prepare and qualify themselves?

    Another thing to consider....They are kids. We can't even get our adult membership in the church to always do the right thing. Good luck with the kids. Unless we send them when they are 8, this will always be a problem.

  8. 51 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

     So... this boils down to... People don't go on missions because they don't want to or don't qualify. 

    Well... yeah. 

    The question is why don't they want to? Why are they unwilling to prepare and qualify themselves?

    Perhaps their limited experience growing up makes them not want to. 

    Maybe their older brother is an rm and tells them his mission sucked,,,,worst two years ever. Or a friend who writes and tells them that.

    Maybe they dont have a testimony.

    Maybe they are tired of their hardliner parents banging their fist on the kitchen table ordering them to do......insert standard momon task of any type....

    Perhaps they have a girlfriend and won't leave her

    Maybe they just flat out don't feel like it

    Maybe these days they feel they can actually make their own decision as opposed to being forced to go by their parents.

    Perhaps they don't actually believe they are a bad person for not going

    Maybe they found out  that many lds girls will marry a non rm contrary to what others may say

    Maybe they are not going because it really isn't mandatory despite many who will claim it is. Make it mandatory and ex comm anyone who doesn't go.

    Right or wrong, everyone who doesn't go has their own reasons. I feel today's youth stand up for themselves a bit more than in the past.....and some have parents like me who actually let them make their own decision as opposed to just telling them what to do.

    Take your pick....collectively many are not too excited to go so I guess Houston has a problem. 


    I have an idea...let's start compulsory military service in this country and the only exception being serving your particular church for 2 years full time. We all know how many lds consider the military to be a rather poor choice of them flock to the mtc.


  9. 1 hour ago, Sunday21 said:

     I knew the ‘backstage’ of many lds families because I babysat, helped on service projects and generally filled in as needed. Holy Smokes! Some of those Mormons! I am amazed that their families did not kill them! I had some difficulty believing that the church was true despite the whispering of the spirit. How could such awful people have the gospel?

    My family is/was hardcore LDS. One could very easily call them total hardliners, but they were not abusive or evil. They probably would have given me anything i asked if I promised to go on a mission...I am sure of that. Anything to get me to go. It was very humiliating to them for me to not go. Long lineage in the church...pioneers on both sides and the whole bit. They freaked out when I acted on my decision. That said, they cooled off and treated me well. My leadership in the ward , not so much. I think most LDS families don't wig out too much over kids not serving a mission. What do you do tell them they are evil and kick them out of the family???If that was the normal practice, then the religion itself may need examining. 

    One can also find this same behavior in some families with a long history of males serving in the military (or a number of other things). I had a Platoon Leader who went to VMI, ranger school and then onto the infantry because his whole family did and he was too. He openly despised and talked poorly of the us army. He eventually went away because of it. We hated having the leader who wasn't into the game. 

    Well, we know the truth of a lot of things and sadly it does not change our behavior. We know ‘Too much food = too fat.’ We are still fat! Yep...too much donuts for me



  10. 37 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

    I could easily be wrong; but my recollection is that the Church self-insures its real estate holdings.  I would be mildly surprised to hear that it held a “sexual-predators-in-the-clergy” policy written by an outside company.

    Im sure they do. Most any organization has a policy to cover all kinds of include perverts. Just something that cant be controlled fully. It happens and depending on how the organization handles it generally determined how much you pay. If the guilty party is on the company clock, the company is on the hook. The more asleep at the switch the company appears, the greater their responsibility for failure to act...negligent retention, policy failure, lack of policy, etc.

  11. 9 minutes ago, mrmarklin said:

    You all realize of course that there is likely insurance to cover the Church’s costs, right?

    Why this has gone on this long os a mystery to me.

    They likely have a set amount they have to pay no matter--- like a deductible. Beyond that, they will have a couple insurance companies to cover various expenses with ceilings of course. Lloyds of London is a company that covers these types of things.

  12. - re stats, dwindling numbers etc, When has this been a game of numbers? Do we want quality converts who know what they are getting into or do we just want to baptize as  many as possible in the hopes we retain a few?...asking for a friend

    - why don't kids go on missions? Well since I didn't go I feel kinda qualified to answer that at least as it applied to me. This was mid '80s and not in Utah btw.

    First off- I never planned on a mission- went military so there's that. That issue aside, I associated with LDS friends in HS who ranged from 16 to 19 ish. Our group of LDS kids were quite into the party scene. I'm talking everyone there was involved with something having to do with beer, cigs, pot, coke, sex, gambling etc.... Some just dabbled and there were a few others who went all the way in more ways than one. Not all the kids in my ward and surrounding wards were into that, but there were a few dozen. There were two ( I was one of them)in my cohort who did not go on a mission. Here are some observations and my thoughts at the the time being relevant because we want to know why kids are not going on missions.

    So there is this party scene. When you are in that you know what everyone else is up to. When they all of a sudden are leaving on a mission and you were partying with them a couple weeks prior one sometimes wonders how that is even possible. That said, I always gave them crap about going on a mission after doing whatever and how they pulled that off...two answers I was given. They either lied their way through the process or they confessed and were then able to go. I'm not one to tattle so their secret was safe with me.

    What I didn't understand was how someone could allegedly confess and get sent off just a couple weeks later....for drug use and fornication! And the others who lied...well I guess no one knew any better.

    So here I am thinking, "ok this process is supposed to be inspired. Many of these guys are no way even close to being worthy to go on a mission and thru the temple, yet they are. So either it is inspired or not." Beats me because we have guys who lie to go do it and others who confess and allegedly get all repented and all in a matter of a few weeks and then go. At that point I was like ok well definitely not an inspired process because they are letting anyone with a heartbeat go and some of these guys made me look like peter priesthood. Frankly I had no business going. The difference between me and them was I was at least honest about not being worthy and others were not, yet I and my friend were treated like trash because we didn't go.

    So nowadays the bar has been raised. What is interesting is just from the knowledge of my own little social experiment which is very unscientific, I would venture to say there are at least a few bishops out there who in their day wouldn't have cut it, yet here they are vetting a kid for a standard they (at the time) never met. Interesting.

    Another aspect to look at- where I grew up the parents had some money, not tons and many of the kids were promised cars and paid for college when they got back. If they didn't go, they didn't get it. I was also presented with that option. I didn't go and had to pay for everything on my own. Fair deal.

    ...bottom line- at the time I felt that if you could lie your way into a mission, then it wasn't true anyway. Even if it was I wasn't going because I had another plan so it wouldn't have mattered anyway.

    -Coming home from missions early. In my own ward and stake we have had tons leave and come right back (within 6 mos). I have no idea why other than in a couple cases and that was one unresolved sin and the others were they just hated it and came home (my son was the source of that feedback). I'm not going to pretend to know how hard it is to be away from home that long doing mission stuff so I am not going to criticize anyone for coming back early.  I think that they are because it has been made easy to do so and maybe even acceptable.

    When I went to boot camp, I can tell you that for a couple weeks I probably would have left and so would many others if we were allowed to. Problem was you would get tossed in the clink and then prosecuted for AWOL before being dishonorable discharged. The reason I may have taken off was the first two weeks of constant harassment, no sleep, crappy food, incessant name calling and berating your mother, your religion, your race or anything else they could find to humiliate you and berate you. Not to mention the constant grass drills and never ending physical punishment. It literally was a painful experience to even move much less breathe. It was just a tad uncomfortable and after a few weeks once everyone decided they would act as a team it was ok. I say this because it was not really a problem and even enjoyable after a while to put up with their crap because I wanted to be there. When you are motivated, it is easier to do difficult things. When you are not, it can be a prison sentence.

    I feel many of these kids don't even want to go and given the very regimented environment they are in, they just bail out when the drama exceeds their willingness to tolerate it...whatever that drama may be. So if they are motivated and actually wanted to go then their odds of staying are much higher than someone who's arm got twisted or their parents bribed them. How many kids fall into either category is unknown. 

    I always told my kids if they wanted to go, then go because you want to go and it is the right thing to do. If you do go- do a good job and finish it. I'll never even try and persuade you to go and I never bugged them about it. They decided according to their motivations and convictions not mine.

  13. 5 hours ago, Carborendum said:

    You're right.  They never did.  Someone from Provo Police DECIDED (just as you required) to share it with BYU, all on his own.  But you're still putting this at the feet of BYU as if they had some sort of control over the Provo PD.

    U need to go read up on this. Provo never gave the report to BYU. BYU pd looked it up. They are being investigated for this along with thousands of other questionable inquiries into the database. The volume of inquiries by BYU plummeted once they found out they were being investigated. Tells ya something right there.

  14. 17 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

    But that is exactly what happened.  And you've decided to cry foul anyway.

    Face it.  You're simply a detractor who will always find something to complain about no matter what.

    That is not what happened. BYU never callled Provo. Was the other way around when three weeks later Provo is like what are you guys doing looking up this report?

    Lets just say for example later on the court and investigators find BYU Police broke the law in dealing with this issue. Are you fine with a govt organization (Police) breaking the law in order to further the mission of BYU? If so what other laws are you ok with the police breaking? Where is the line with you??? Lastly- are you ok with your local police breaking the law in order to get you for something...anything? 

  15. 3 minutes ago, DoctorLemon said:

    OK I read the rest of your posts.  They should not have told everyone with ears, what they did, because frankly it ain't anyone else's business!  What is that saying - don't show your dirty laundry?

    Might as well tell everyone and get the story out there. If not some of the more verbally accomplished women in the ward will make up their own reason and it won't be good.

  16. Just now, DoctorLemon said:

    I think that is very sad.  The couple in your ward were just trying to take care of themselves and avoid a really bad situation.  Getting married under such circumstances is honorable, not a subject for ridicule.

    Sure ...that's why I replied they may want to beware. 

    When they told me I was like are you serious? You can't wait two more weeks? They said nope and I was like well ok ...whatever.

  17. 1 minute ago, Carborendum said:

    You're gossiping about them here.  Why were people laughing at them?  What did they do wrong?

    You don't see any humor in them running around talking about how badly they have to have sex now??? That is literally what they were for gossip. A...I'm not naming them and B...heard it from them as did everyone else. It's true. They literally went around telling people this because they felt they should tell everyone why they cancelled the sealing. Nice way of saying thanks for your RSVP, but we have to go knock boots now.

    It was ridiculous....people literally were asking them they couldn't wait two more weeks and they just laughed. 

  18. 2 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

    "A laughing stock"?  Why?  They did what they needed to do in order to keep the commandments.  What are people laughing about?  They (the gossip mongers) are the ones who need to repent.

    Repent??? The kids announced it to everyone who would listen. It isnt gossip.

    We cant wait for two more weeks to have sex were getting married now!!! People were dying laughing at them.

  19. 23 hours ago, DoctorLemon said:

    If you are having a tough time keeping the law of chastity with your fiance, maybe you should consider getting your fiance and just going to the courthouse and getting married, today.  It may not be an ideal solution, but it is worlds better than trying to wait a couple of months and winding up breaking the law of chastity !

    I like that solution...beware though. We had a couple In our old ward who did that and told everyone. They were a laughing stock. Couldn't wait 2 more weeks. Just wait till ur married in the temple.

  20. 2 hours ago, Carborendum said:

    That is a good point.  We don't know the terms of the contract.

    Oh, I guess we DO know the terms of the contract.  And they appeared to be satisfied.

    Not assault.  Not even illegal.  Still Jacked Up.  Why jacked up?

    I remember having a discussion about A.I. with a college roommate.  His religion professor had gone over the topic of donor sperm and said it was no different than having sex with the donor.  In his mind it was fornication or adultery.

    I really had to raise my eye about that.  But reviewing this article and situations like it, there is something to his statement.  I don't think I'd go so far as calling it adultery.  But there is just something wrong with the whole situation.  And I'm thinking that donor sperm is not what the Lord intended to be the method of bringing children into this world. 

    Still, that appears to be what the mother wanted.  Waddya gonna do?

    Actually the contract stated the donor sperm had to meet certain the donor had to. The Dr did not meet those specifications. I recall it had to do with hair and eye color, height and had to be a college student. That said, the contract was probably violated.

  21. 6 hours ago, John_Pack_Lambert said:

    And if you do not believe that the prophets are inspired of God you do not have to pay any tithing. And if you want to use drugs and sleep around in college you are more than welcome at the University of Utah and should leave space at BYU for people who actually support the mission of the Church. Instead of ones like Barney who lie in wait to deceive, and when their sexual appetites are stopped make up lies of rape.

    No kidding...I don't care how the church runs their school as it is theirs. At the point they decide to use a governmental organization (byu  pd) to enforce moral issues which are not violations of the law and do not happen on their campus, then there actually is a public interest at that point in how a police department which has been ruled a government organization is wielding its state powers. Tithing funded or not....they opened themselves up to this. If they don't want the scrutiny, disband the police department and go back to security guards who have no powers. Then they can call Provo pd anytime the find a kid with a beer or not having shaved. Provo pd then can decide what they will help out with.