laronius

I actually agree with your first point. Though I admit that this is mainly because Pres Nelson said the development of these vaccines was an answer to prayer. So yes, vaccines are good.
I don't agree with all of your second point. I do agree that we as Americans do have a superiority complex. Some of it I think is actually true because of the origins of our nation but we are definitely in decline. But concerning this specific issue I don't think it's fair to blame conservatives. It was liberal politicians that pushed stricter measures. The general public, both liberal and conservative, were glad to move with life. Otherwise half the population would still be wearing masks.
For your third point keeping companies honest is ALWAYS a good thing. We cannot be free if we don't have truth. Many good things, like vaccines, have potential negative side effects. That's just life. But people must be able to make informed decisions.
Concerning your fourth point, the LDS Church does not lean left or right, it is politically neutral. But it's very clear that it's values are far closer to conservative principles and values than liberalism. If it's members feel otherwise that's their problem not the Church's.

Joseph Smith: "If men do not comprehend the character of God, they do not comprehend themselves..."
I think the problem started with the Nicene Creed which attempted to make God incomprehensible. It has only gotten worse over time. 

Joseph Smith: "If men do not comprehend the character of God, they do not comprehend themselves..."
I think the problem started with the Nicene Creed which attempted to make God incomprehensible. It has only gotten worse over time. 

Joseph Smith: "If men do not comprehend the character of God, they do not comprehend themselves..."
I think the problem started with the Nicene Creed which attempted to make God incomprehensible. It has only gotten worse over time. 

Joseph Smith: "If men do not comprehend the character of God, they do not comprehend themselves..."
I think the problem started with the Nicene Creed which attempted to make God incomprehensible. It has only gotten worse over time. 

This morning on r/fountainpens (reddit), I saw that some poor soul had asked, "What kind of person uses a fountain pen?"  I made assumptions and kept scrolling without stopping to read, but the question (and the fact that the population there is so young and woke) made me realize that folks look for "belonging" and external definitions of "what kind of person" they are wherever they can find it because it's not taught anymore.
No one taught these poor people who they are.  And I don't just mean the gender identity crisis people, I mean the vast majority of the most recent generation or two.  At some point in the past, folks were taught that they were [nationality] or [religion] or [family] (and all the stuff packed inside the words).  Now, they're taught to reject nationality and religion, and told that family has such a broad definition as to be meaningless.  No wonder people are chasing after whatever fad or cause they feel like they can "belong" to.  Sigh.  The world needs the gospel of Jesus Christ.
I was reminded of the May 2022 Worldwide Devotional for Young Adults with President and Sister Nelson.  Critical quote:
I don't know that I had any discussion in mind, it just seemed like people need to be taught who they are, and we need to make sure we don't forget who we are.  Those of us who were taught (and have learned) who we are should be eternally grateful for that knowledge!

When I was in the bishopric, we had 4 small children and the two older boys were difficult for my wife to handle by herself.  I asked the bishop if I could have one of my boys sit with me on the stand.  It worked and my boys were better behaved for it.
As a side note – not so long ago, as a member of the Elder’s quorum presidency, I was left to preside without any other priesthood leadership – everybody else was out of town.  As it turned out all the others on the stand were ladies.  Both the talks, youth speaker, music conductor, organists and opening prayer.  Those blessing the sacrament and the ward clerk sat at the far sides of the stans so they did not really count.    I took the opportunity to comment that sitting on the stand in the midst of such spiritual ladies, that I felt like a lion in a den of Danials.
 
The Traveler

@zil2 You are correct that the creatio ex nihilo group has to grapple with God as the creator of evil, where those of us who don't subscribe to creatio ex nihilo have the luxury of being able to say that evil exists independent of God. But that is only part of the problem of evil. As it relates to the OP, there is also the problem of various ways that evil and suffering exist (sports injury, war, natural disaster, illness, accidents, etc.) that God (we usually believe) could intervene to prevent or alleviate, but He chooses not to intervene.

My point is that most people believe that God created everything, everyone, everywhere, and everywhen.  That all time and existence and matter and everything other than God was created by God.  This means evil was created by God (whether directly or by creating that / those which would choose evil),  since nothing co-exists, or pre-exists God, nor comes into existence without God.
Joseph Smith taught that this is not correct.  All intelligent beings have always existed.  We are eternal, with no beginning and no end.  In other words, there is some part of us that God did not create.  Further, he taught that we are the same species as God and that God once existed as a mortal man.  If all that is true, then space (room in which to exist) is also co-eternal with God (unless one wants to argue that beings can exist without having space in which to exist).  I won't try to argue that clock-like time has always existed, but I think it's reasonable to believe that sequences of events have always existed, and therefore when has always existed. (How can you exist without existing for a duration?  Eternity itself is a duration, so "when" has always existed - otherwise, how could I be using the word "always"? )
Therefore, we have intelligences, space, and "when" that were not created.  Therefore, we do not have to believe that God created evil, or that he knowingly created beings who would choose evil, nor that there was something he didn't know (that some of us would choose evil), etc.  We can believe that evil (the option to go contrary to light and truth) has always been an option, just as intelligences, space, and when have always existed.  We can believe that he is helping intelligences to progress, if they so choose, and that if they choose evil, it is their choice, not his.  If he holds any blame, it is in not stopping them (but we believe agency is so important that God basically has to allow it, by his own choice and because it is the most right thing to do).
The "God created everything" crowd have to struggle with why God created evil (either directly or indirectly).  Those of us who believe what Joseph Smith taught know that God did not create evil and only allows his children to choose it because agency is critical to our eternal existence.  (And scripture teaches that when things get bad enough, God will step in and either guide his children away from the evil, or destroy those who have so thoroughly chosen evil that they don't need more time in mortality to make their choice.)

While there is much riding on this mortal existence we did not come into this world with a blank slate. Blank from sin, yes, but not blank in who we are. Who we are has been molded over the course of, perhaps, eons before we came here. Our Heavenly Father, who is omniscient, knows us better than we know ourselves and he already knew, before we were born, what we needed to experience in order to maximize our individual willingness to change and progress. Whether long or short this life is sufficient to bring about the Lord's purposes in our eternal advancement.
You keep referring to the principle of fairness and seem to define it as an equal amount of time in mortality. But conditions vary so much on earth in time period, location and family circumstances that I don't know how we could use length of life as a measure of fairness. For example, which is more fair, living to be 15 in an LDS family in modern Utah or to be 100 in ancient Sodom? 
I have had thoughts that are similar to yours, such as how can the guy I know get killed by an IED in Afghanistan one month after his first child is born? How is it possible that his time on earth was considered sufficient while others live to an old age? Yes, he had accepted the gospel but there is so much to learn still. But at the end of the day God does not fill us in on those details. Rather, he says "I love my children and based on my omniscience and the great mercy made available through the atonement of my Son I will do all within my power to save them to the fullest extent possible" and that's just something we have to exercise our faith in. I think we all will feel that the final outcome for each of us will be far more than fair. 

I have thought about this very thing so I offer a couple thoughts I've had. First of all, it may very well be tied to the principle of faith. In the next life that veil we currently have over our eyes is removed and as a result much of the faith we must act under here is removed. I think that may be a factor.
But I think a bigger factor simply comes down to the amount of law we want to submit to. It's not just about where we want to end up but also which laws we want to obey. Most everyone would say they'd like to be rich. But how many are actually willing to do what it usually takes to become so? It's the same here. I don't think anyone will be barred from the celestial kingdom that is willing to live a celestial law. And as a rule how a person lives in this life, with whatever amount of truth they possess, will be a pretty good indicator of what people really want. But I also think that there are those who take a little longer to figure things out, like Alma the younger and the Lord makes sure that all such individuals will have that opportunity. God WANTS to save everyone to the fullest extent they are willing to receive and will provide sufficient opportunity to each individual according to His perfect knowledge of us. That is something we can have complete faith in.

I really like your concept of faith.  I will not pretend to understand faith anymore than anyone else, my life’s work was as an engineer and scientist and see much through that filter.  I have some difficulty just decerning the difference between faith, belief and knowledge.  During my lifetime I have seen the scientific understanding of things change greatly.  I remember learning about neutrinos in my quantum physics courses in college.  Back then no one seemed to understand or think that neutrinos had much to do with anything of consequence in the universe.  Now, it is believed that neutrinos are the key component that drives everything that exists in the creation and forming of the universe as we currently think we know it.
In religion we learn a little bit about the levels of glory within the kingdom of G-d and with that little understanding we may think we know, individual by individual who is worthy of what level of glory.  I think what we start to do is compare ourselves to what we think we know of others.  Generally, we are likely to think we will be in the highest Celestial glory.  Then we compare ourselves to others or others to ourselves thinking we have a decent idea if they will make it or not.
I believe it is not for us to decide what degree of glory anyone other than ourselves are achieving.   Not those we think righteous as well as those we think wicked.  The only person we really know that much about is ourselves.  The real and only question for us to understand is if we are willing to exercise our faith to achieve Celestial Glory.  President Nelsen has admonished us to “Think Celestial”.  Jesus said as we think so are we and so shall we become.  I am beginning to think that like neutrinos that are so unaffected by anything else and have such difficulty interacting with anything we may start out thinking we are worthless.  But then, as we begin to understand where we came from and where we can go and what we can do – we can have faith in what we (and everyone else) can impact and become.
 
The Traveler

I have thought about this very thing so I offer a couple thoughts I've had. First of all, it may very well be tied to the principle of faith. In the next life that veil we currently have over our eyes is removed and as a result much of the faith we must act under here is removed. I think that may be a factor.
But I think a bigger factor simply comes down to the amount of law we want to submit to. It's not just about where we want to end up but also which laws we want to obey. Most everyone would say they'd like to be rich. But how many are actually willing to do what it usually takes to become so? It's the same here. I don't think anyone will be barred from the celestial kingdom that is willing to live a celestial law. And as a rule how a person lives in this life, with whatever amount of truth they possess, will be a pretty good indicator of what people really want. But I also think that there are those who take a little longer to figure things out, like Alma the younger and the Lord makes sure that all such individuals will have that opportunity. God WANTS to save everyone to the fullest extent they are willing to receive and will provide sufficient opportunity to each individual according to His perfect knowledge of us. That is something we can have complete faith in.

2020 was just a crazy year because of COVID. Nothing was normal so it's hard to know what really happened. I think in a normal year Biden would not have been elected. But with people largely stuck in their homes for 6 months leading up to the election and many watching the mainstream media around the clock it's hard to know what exactly people were thinking. On the one hand I would not be surprised if election fraud changed the outcome. But on the other my opinion of the general public is such nowadays that it wouldn't surprise me if anyone got elected in a fair election. Though I will say that while prophecy does not specifically address the presidential election I think it's obvious where things are headed and so I try to not get too aggravated by it all. 

This is the gist of the Replacement Theology argument: The Jewish people broke the "If my people..." conditions and so inherited the "If my people do not ..." warnings. Thus, God replaced the Jews with the Christian church. 
My difficulty with this approach is that we have all failed God. Jesus forgives 70X7. The cycle throughout the Old Testament was of sin (whoring after false gods--not just corrupt Judaism, but full-on Paganism), repentance, forgiveness, blessing, and gradual drifting away. Every time they came back, God forgave them. His covenant remains.
Every time I repent, likewise, God embraces his prodigal son. We need the Old Testament largely because it reminds us that as undependable as we are, God remains true to His word.

I think there are some definite similarities between the Americas as a promised land and the lands of Israel but there are differences too. Namely, the Americas as a land of promise seems to be transferable to whomever the Lord wants where as the lands of Israel have never been given to anyone but them though they may not have always retained possession of it.

I have absolutely no problem with the existence of a species that falls somewhere between man and primate. Considering the differing levels of "intelligence" found all along the spectrum it would even make sense. Though the when and circumstances of their existence is a little more fuzzy. But if they were not sons and daughters of God I'm not sure they could mate with man. That would pose a problem with their premortal identity I would think.

Whenever we speak of scientific facts we are really just speaking about observations that SO FAR appear consistent. This doesn't mean science is just guess work. Scientists probably get a great many things right. If that were not so God would not have told us to gain a knowledge of these things. But what it does mean is that every scientific fact, unless revealed by God, is restricted to man's experience and comprehension. Jesus did not seem to be bound by certain scientific laws during his mortal ministry. So whenever you encounter science that seems convincing, respect the science but leave room for God.
Having said that, concerning the argument that is being made concerning determinism, the author points out that our prefrontal cortex is shaped, while we are young, by an environment that we generally don't have much control over and as such our decision making is controlled by factors outside of our own choosing. While it's true that our physical bodies and our upbringing can have great influence upon us, the fact remains that we are surrounded by evidence/people who turn out completely different from what their environment would seem to dictate. People with good backgrounds going bad and vice versa. Siblings growing up in the same environment but turning out totally different from one another. The author's argument, while sounding logical, does not in any way reflect reality. That's why it is so hard to believe because everything in life, whether we can explain it or not, says it simply is not true. 

Actually, based upon the teachings of both of our churches, this is proof that God is. 😉

I had been discussing this with a family member and had the same conclusion.  That our body is hardware and our spirit or will is software.  Sure the stats of the hardware directly impacts our “fps” or performance in general. That bring the case  doesn’t mean the pc is running itself. 

Had to share this commentary from the wife of my youth.

Whenever we speak of scientific facts we are really just speaking about observations that SO FAR appear consistent. This doesn't mean science is just guess work. Scientists probably get a great many things right. If that were not so God would not have told us to gain a knowledge of these things. But what it does mean is that every scientific fact, unless revealed by God, is restricted to man's experience and comprehension. Jesus did not seem to be bound by certain scientific laws during his mortal ministry. So whenever you encounter science that seems convincing, respect the science but leave room for God.
Having said that, concerning the argument that is being made concerning determinism, the author points out that our prefrontal cortex is shaped, while we are young, by an environment that we generally don't have much control over and as such our decision making is controlled by factors outside of our own choosing. While it's true that our physical bodies and our upbringing can have great influence upon us, the fact remains that we are surrounded by evidence/people who turn out completely different from what their environment would seem to dictate. People with good backgrounds going bad and vice versa. Siblings growing up in the same environment but turning out totally different from one another. The author's argument, while sounding logical, does not in any way reflect reality. That's why it is so hard to believe because everything in life, whether we can explain it or not, says it simply is not true. 

I think the doctrine is pretty clear in this matter: if we are worthy of a blessing and willing to receive it, but for some reason denied it, then we will receive it in the next life. This includes blessings we have lost somewhere along the way but now want to recover. Remain worthy and willing and trust in God's love for you.

Indeed.  And at a time when we are still dickering over getting the Dubai temple built, and looking towards keeping good relations with the Arab partners of the BYU Jerusalem center, it’s conceivable that the Lord doesn’t feel the costs are worth the benefits for the Church to come out as stridently pro-Israel.

If they didn't make a Twilight Zone episode about this they missed a great opportunity.