the Ogre

Those are great pics. Isn't President Hinckley great. He has one of the best smiles ever.

When the final bell has been rung and we are standing before The L-rd, will it matter who is LDS and who is not? In that day it will be those who The L-rd knows, the rest H- will not and cast out. Though the Telestial and Terrestrial Kingdoms are not as bad as The Outer Darkness, it will be of as much worth if one can not live in the pressence of G-d.Our hearts will be exposed and judged by what we knew to be true or by what we have been taught or witnessed of. Status in any religious body will be moot (think of the bit about the Children of Abraham and a bunch of rocks). The hypocricy of our words and actions will be what defile/condemn us as the unwashed and thus unwelcome. Have I been taught by my parents and fellowmen the right way to salvation? Yes, but then the question will be: "what did I do about it?" It is then that we will relie on Grace. I am not worthy of exhaltation, but I hope I won't be found too wanting. I have a lot of work to do. By the standards of Mainstream American Protestants, I'm saved (even though they might brand me a cultist or heretic of some sort). As a Latter-day Saint, I know I'm converted and as active as I can be, but Celestial Salvation is going to be hard. Faith though is what keeps me going along the path I know: Love. Isn't there something that says: "If ye love Me, obey my commandments" (this quote and the following are not quite right) and that the two greatest commandments are "to Love The L-rd... and our neighbors... and that here in lie all the law and the prophets." If one equates work with love, then I guess that one ought to be about it.

I agree with you on this. Not only are they equally extreme (often for just the purpose of extremism) and both sides have gotten crossed regarding what it means to be a lineral or conservative.

Outshined: Dude, good luck. My brother's SF and has done two tours in Iraq and one in Aphganistan (and several in Kuwait before the war, he was also in GW I). He says it's boring, but then he's SF so his opinion can't be trusted. Good luck.

I am so excited about the book and the movie. When I get the books, I usually read it really fast (The night it comes out) and tell everyone the ending (many of my friends of course have learned to avoid me until they've read it first).

Honestly, I don't get homosexuality. As an English major, I've had to study queer theory, Gay and lesbian studies, and I've gotten As in all my classes that have dealt with identity politics and I think I might go into it in grad school, but that does not mean I understand the motivation behind homosexuality. One of the best Professors at UVSC is a lesbian. She is an amazing teacher and her wife is a very nice person. I don't mind a live and let live policy and I would not mind supporting giving equal civil/commercial-rights to homosexuals, but ultimately, I am LDS and I sustain the Proclamation on the Family and I appreciate the line in the sand the church makes. This line does not say, ban homosexual behavior, it says a marriage is between a man and a woman. The church has also said that marriage must be consumated in the temple. I wish this man well. The people I know here at UVSC who are claim homosexual lifestyles are often quite nice. It is a complicated situation. Ulitimately, for me, the situation is where men must come to G-d, not the other way around. This is where all conflict is going to be concentrated in the future. Aaron the (blue) Ogre

Well, since they couldn't get Rosie, maybe they could get Roseann Barr? That at least would be a local connection. Aaron the Ogre

CK (sorry, I called you 6pak before),Yes. It's not a hard point you are making. Okay, but don't worry about the attitudes of people you cannot change. If you want to discuss the entitlement attitude, then discuss the system. The system might be the only thing you can change. The system is broken. The structure is corrupt. No one disagrees with you (on this board).The problem you are running into is a conflict over terminology and the perceptions people have regarding said terminology. It is the words in question, not the attitudes of those who disagree with you. You have described a problem of attitude and I understand what you are saying, but do you understand the harmful nature of the words used that has caused all this headache? One of the ways that the structure is broken is that civil discourse is impossible when language gets in the way. Do you want to make a point about the lazy people who take advantage of the system like the bum that lives down-stairs from me? If so, don't call the guy a bum, but discover the way he takes advantage of the system and squash that. People who are belittled will always have champions. My advise: don't label. Labeling is like pornography in that it reduces a person to inhuman levels or puts them in the position of social-outcasts. The label 'Mormon' when attached to Mitt Romney has reduced him in the eyes of many people so much so that they will not consider him or his message, because for some reason he has become a violation of what is socially acceptable. All classification reduces a person, simplifies a person to the point that they are no longer considered viable partners in a discourse. This reductionism is exactly what pornography has done to the perceptions of many men regarding women in general. Reductionism is exactly what Freud did to religion when he dissected it and made it distasteful in the eyes of science. The problem is: you don't mean to do any of this. You don't think of welfare moms, trailer-trash, or lazy bums as sub-human, but that is not what others (their heroes) hear. There is nothing you can do about another's perception. Nothing. Typing in all caps doesn't help (I can't read it--I had to copy and paste your response into Word Perfect and convert it into standard text just to understand you). Getting angry does nothing. You want to discuss entitlement attitude/addiction? Good; don't name call otherwise you will be dealing with a broken discursive structure and no one will be able to agree on anything and even worse, no one will listen and then label you. Aaron the Ogre

6pak,n'K Perceptions are everything when it comes to politics. You are not being insulting? I believe you, but does that mean people are not being hurt? Of course not. Don't worry about it. I think there is consensus regarding the content, but not so much on the terminology. It is merely a matter of semantics. Do you want to debate? Great. Do it. Don't do exactly what the people you politically distrust do on a regular basis. Don't you remember the "right wing conspiracy" bit Hillary went on about? It is no different. I'm not insulted (BTW, Emma's comparison of the N-word and TT were right on in my mind even if it wasn't in yours, but like I said, don't worry about it). Aaron the Ogre

This is the exact LDS thought. The only problem comes to an LDS concept called priestcraft. I tease my seminary teacher friend about it. Should one be paid for their service or their job as a professional clergyman? I always tell him he needs to more like the Lilies of the Field.I mentioned once before I have had problems with military chaplains (in basic training, they told us that there were no local LDS services in New Jersey, but eventually an LDS drill sergeant found the three of us in our company and we were marched to church with the other new recruits on post [i.e. the chaplain lied about the existence of local LDS services—BTW, I have more stories like this]). They have to be there. Someone has to be available to serve the needs of soldiers and in your case inmates. It was not until LBJ that there were LDS chaplains in the military (it took a special request from the first presidency directly to LBJ and eventually a presidential order) and it was not until the current conflict in Iraq that the number of LDS chaplains proportionally matched the number of LDS servicemen (even if they never conduct the meetings and services in the serviceman's groups unless they are specifically called to by local [and often civilian] ecclesiastical leadership). The conflict is discussed in the Book of Mormon specifically in reference to Korihor and Nehor (there are other examples however). Being a chaplain to people who are constrained or who lack the ability to find their own church is important. I am glad you serve the people you serve, but the next issue is then the LDS ordinances that always get attached to this topic. How does one reconcile these ordinances to grace? I’m sure you have had people tell you on this site in the past so I won’t, but this has always been a sore issue when it has been brought up in the past.

Emma,The other problem in thinking in these terms is who are the missionaries teaching when they serve in areas like the Bronx, Washington D.C., Hampton VA (I was in the military near there), Chigago, or other parts of the nation where the number of people on state support out number those not? The gospel is for them as well isn't it. If they are met by hatred or these types of labels, how are they going to feel about the church? We need to support self-sufficiency, but not hatred. President Hinkley discussed this very type hatred in confrence priesthood session not too long ago. This kind of language and the differentiation between members and investigators based on socio-economic terms needs to end. If these terms are faddish, for example if they buzz-words coming from Hannity or Coulter, then maybe these voices are as inspirational as listening to Slip-knot, Korn, and Metallica. Aaron the Ogre

There is a CES study that reported 60% of LDS men have suffered from one sort of porn-addiction or another and that 100% of Aaronic Priesthood holding young men have seen pornography. I heard the above information from Bro. Eggett at the UVSC Institute. I have not read the study personally. I think that study might be interesting for your research, but I have no idea how accurate the information I heard is. An associate of mine from work just went though a divorce because of his multiple on-line porn subscriptions. He is thinking about leaving the church because his Bishop "came out on her side." I have no idea what he is talking about, but he doesn't think porn is that big a deal. My divorce was not about porn, but about my ex leaving to marry another man (she met him at her work). I would say my associate's porn addiction affected his relationship with not only his wife, but his mother (she sided with his ex) and children. I have known this guy since I went to the Y in the early nineties and he has never had much self-esteem. My guess is that porn only deflated him further by subjectifying his relationships and understanding of women to such a degree that he doesn't deal with reality and misinterprets all advise and rejection. He hates his ex, his mother, his therapists, and his bishop. He can only visit his children when they are at his parents. His temper is so bad right now that unless he satisfies the courts regarding his emotional stability, he will never be able to be in an unescorted situation with his kids (I don't know much about the divorce details, but there has to be more going on). I can’t stand being around him, but he is always going on about it and has gotten warnings about these conversations from management. Regarding your ex, I bet the dude lied to his ecclesiastical leaders. It happens. You could report it, but I doubt anything happens.

As a matter of fact, there are a few bits. Mmmmmm yummy.

Blue,I'm wondering if everyone will want to repent? I don't know the answer to that question, but it might come to play somewhere. The next thing to do though is make sure cleaning up your life is what you want to do. Don't worry about where you end up, but just do it so that your life will be a better place to live now. There are very few people who know where they will end up right now, so then improving your condition has to be personal choice regardless of future glory or status in the LDS church. Aaron the Ogre

I don't think you'd want to. I licked them fingers off.

It is had to discuss Grace and Works with a professional clergyman. I've never heard of a chaplain or pastor who got paid piece-work or hourly-wages, though I'm sure these thoughts and union cards have come-up somewhere. Obviously, there is a need for professional clergymen and chaplains throughout the world however. I know this is a divergence, but I believe there can not be grace without works. The very act of admitting being saved is a form of action. A work. The then question is: is that it? I don't think professional clergy agree, or otherwise the pews would be empty. Those who claim the grace of G-d though being saved are encouraged to go to church. A work. Sing along with the other parishioners. More work. Pray. Work. I recently attended an\ non-denominational church in Orem with a friend as an exchange of sorts. The pastor asked people to pray during the week for the local soldiers in Iraq. Work. There were opportunities to volunteer with the United Way. Work, work. The band and choir need to rehearse for a special forth-of-July meeting. Work, work, work. What about forgiveness? Work. One must work to gain the Lord's forgiveness in order to feel forgiven (in my case: work x 200 – I’m always running my stupid mouth). All of this is Christian Activism. Latter-day Saints are asked do this as well in their day to day lives, though we might not associate "activism" with works (the term is too closely identified with being a liberal). So, what then for a clergyman? A clergyman's entire life is a series of works. Every aspect of being a chaplain means doing nothing unless there is something attached to the faith. Even when Father Mulcahy in MASH shoots craps with Klinger or doubles as a card-shark, there is a religious underpinning to every act. Father Mulcahy is doing more than begging for forgiveness, he is serving his flock in the ways he feels he must. So the question becomes: when is service or work on behalf of your flock work-deserving-grace and not just doing one's job? This dirty question applies to Latter-day Saints as well. So often in our society, callings and service are rewarded by intangible social advancements. We get paid for what we do in ways that make it seem like an actual exchange no different than being paid for our service. A friend of mine is a seminary-teacher at Mountain View High School. He is on salary. He says seminary teachers are expected to be "on" at all times. There is no "off" time. Everyone loves and admires the sister who has four or five callings. This love is a reward. Bill talked about the work he does on behalf of his community, he is great person and he has my admiration and envy. I hope when I’m finally finished with school I will have the time to volunteer like he does, but isn’t my admiration of Bill and other great people for their activism a type of reward? There is an earthly payoff. When are a person's works genuine even if they are paid to be a Soldier of Chr-st regardless if the recompense is monetary or not?

Uhhh... yeah, but you'll have to lick out the bottom of the can. I cut my finger reaching in as far as I could.

I think Foxworthy says something like: "You can't make fun of red-necks unless you are one and I are one."I saw that on the Blue-Collar comedy tour DVD (boy that Cable-dude is dirty) and so much of that show hit close to home (especially Bill Engval's dogs in the bedroom scenario).

(yed: there's a bearded ogre somewhere in orem ut enjoying a chuckle while eating wal-mart raviolli straight from the can--kids're camping up to farfield canyon teachin' the city kids the finer arts of snipe huntin', craw-fish catchin', and cow-tippin') One of things I'm studying right now in school and might pursue further in grad school (if I go) is identity politics. In the academy, the scholarship focuses mostly on gender-studies, but many people are looking at the labels that are pasted on others involuntarily. An example is the term, "Mormon." I hate the word and cringe when some professor rants on about Mormons this and Mormons that. I consider it a form of hate speech. Now this is when being pc is annoying but often critically important. Naming or labeling is dangerous unless one agrees with the label. I enjoy the labels "Latter-day Saint", "Utah Jazz Fan", and "English Major" ("Ogre", "Werd-nerd" and "Dip-stick" are terms I have never minded in the past) even though these terms often carry a lot of negative weight. This is when CK is wrong in denying the power of comparing the N-word and being TT. It is an amazingly negative term. When my dad retired from the military (his last duty station was Ft. Sill/Lawton, OK where there are thousands of trailer parks—interestingly enough, lots of tornados too) and returned to Provo. The ward we moved into was 50% in a trailer-park (the bishop, the high-priest group leader, and the elder’s quorum president and most of the other ward leaders lived in the Imperial Trailer Park on 500n in Provo). We lived in a house and many of the members thought we were snobs (even though many of their trailers--particularly the double-wides--were in better repair and of more value). Many of the members of this ward were the type portrayed on COPS, but most of them had gone through the repentance process and left their pasts behind them even if they still sat on lawn-chairs in the middle of the road drinking Sprite or Lemon-aid, wore trucker-hats and flannel shirts with the sleeves cut-off exposing their garments while watching the bug-zapper kill off the invaders from the Provo River. This ward was a challenge and some of the people who still live there are feeling even more encroached upon as there are a few modern developments near by and the many BYU newly-weds with rich parents who often feel it was their jobs to teach this obviously backwards ward to operate further exposing the cultural gap between their blue-collar and the more affluent people who now live in their ward boundaries. Labeling is often done without thought or insult (this is where CK, 6pack and others are), but those who do not like to be defined by those labels will be hurt. Regarding the political conversation, I agree regarding the entitlement attitude some people have (whether they siphon off the government, charity, or the church), but these folks cannot be defined by labels or socio-economic status rather the avenues they have for acquiring money without work or merit need to be identified. Tightening up these avenues should be the topic of conversation rather then the personal-identity or cultural-identity of the people who seem to abusing the system the most. Now, I'm not innocent. Everyone has this problem, but not labeling or casting one into a preconceived notion of social status needs to be done away within the church and it would be nice if the rest of the world did the same as well (though this wish is more like "whistling past the graveyard").

Sorry dude,I'm pretty TT myself, I didn't mean it as an attack. Aaron the Ogre

I've been divorced now for five years. I've not remarried and am not currently interested. I can tell you the one joke that stuck to me from the movie Singles Ward is the label in the protagonist's forehead: "Recalled."Often, I feel my lack of calling means I have "quaranteed" across my forehead. Aaron the Ogre

Who says the Irish don't rule the world?

Pam,Thanks Aaron the Ogre

Nope, like I said "fictionalized," but the truth is amazingly similar. I don't own anything of value besides this computer, a '69 F250, student loans, and socks with holes in them.Besides, you might know said Tiffany (not her real name).

It may be color blind...but it is still inappropriate and a put down. Even prostitutes and murderers are children of heavenly father and none of us are trash in his book. He grieves for all his children who choose the wrong, but G-d doesn't make junk. Which leads us back to the article from the Ensign that States: "There certainly was no Burbank Boulevard [a cultural dividing line in San Fernando Valley separating a blue-collar neighborhood from a more affluent one] for the Savior. His message was for saint and sinner, rich and poor alike. The men He chose as Apostles had diverse backgrounds. . . the Saviour was a powerful example of love and acceptance, particularly for those who take upon them His sacred name. There are and always will be differences in our skin color, our nationalities, our careers, our houses, and our material possessions. A fundamental message of the Savior, however, is that these are differences without substance" (Nelson 20). Being white trash, blue-collar, Scotch-Irish, Utah Jazz fan and bigmouthed and ugly are all traits I inherited and are part of who I am, but none of that matters to the L-rd and thus should not be a part of our speech. Junk or Trailor Trash? None of us fits this description. It is a natural tendancy for people to categorize and then base interaction based on these labels. I'm guilty of this, but it is up to me to work on improving myself and bending the natural-man rooted in my stuborn breast to the S-vior's will. Aaron the Ogre *Nelson, J. Robert. "Burbank Blvd. A Lesson in Unimportant Differences." Jay E. Jensen ed. Ensign 37.7 July 2007 20-21