LeSellers

I know you don't care about this, but Christ said that it were better if a millstone were hing about the neck of anyone who offends "one of these little ones". Seems a bit more than just a peccadillo. Lehi

So, I'm a big fan of your overall notion here, yeah, laws are enforced with force. But no, your last statement is absolute hogwash hooey nonsense. Still, cops kill people every week because they "resisted long enough" and aggressively enough. The original infraction or misdemeanor or felony may not be violent or significant, but the resistance leads to the death. Or, sometimes, as @Carborendum illustrated, the person who dies isn't even a true suspect: the old guy dies because someone called SWAT (a big mistake to even have such a force), or, worse, the cops made a mistake and went to the wrong house. In any case, and as you note, all laws are enforced by the (threat of) lethal force. If they weren't, no one would obey them, at least not those that are purely malum prohibitum. Lehi

How would you classify pedophiles? Lehi

Unfortunately, she isn't qualified (as I read it): she had already passed her genes along. Lehi

The only law we need is, "Don't hurt people and don't take or break their stuff." Anything beyond that is too much. Lehi

That's "wayyyy past" anything in my original statement. @Just_A_Guy has it pretty well right, it's the political background that defines my assertion that even a library fine would lead to the political powers sending a lot of armed men with fancy hats and shiny badges who, if you resist long enough and aggressively enough, will kill you. Before anyone says, "There ought to be a law!", he should first ask himself, "Is this important enough to kill someone over it?" You accused me of some dastardly things, and you pass it off with a shrug‽‽ Lehi

As @Awakened implied, this isn't doctrine, as far as I know. There have been women just as evil, throughout history, as any man. Lucretia Borge, Hitliarly Clinton, some of the female NAZI concentration camp guards, and Martin Harris's wife*, just to identify a few. * I'm stretching here, perhaps. And, if we look at truly evil men who did not hold the Priesthood, we find Harvey Milk, Nero, Mao, Pol Pot, and who-know-how-many others. Lehi

I think the issue is resolved by using the classic definition of "marriage", that is, a relationship between a man and a woman. No, I did not say "one man and many women" because in Plural Marriage, as explained elsewhere herein, the man is married to each woman separately and individually, and there is no joining among his wives: they do not participate in any marriage but their own. Lehi

This history of marriage throughout our existence on the earth has been something like what you describe. It was only in the i and I that it became "taboo", when the Romans started to worry about inheritance among the aristocrats. It became de riguer to marry one woman (although they didn't seem concerned at all about serial polygyny). It also made spousal abuse a major concern, especially lethal abuse. See my topic here. The sisters in Utah wrote most of the articles in the Women's Exponent on the subject of Plural Marriage, and they agreed. Lehi

He's left the board. He may either only have limited time to visit the board, OR, he's the "drop bait and run" type of poster. That's one reason I try (not always successfully) to figure out where a new poster is coming from before answering this kind of tenet-based question. Since mine was the first response, and this topic now has buried it, I am trying to elicit that response. Not necessarily to goad him, but to make sure he sees the question. Lehi

I haven't seen an answer to my query. So, again, why do you ask? Lehi

Including most of my brothers, both sisters and their families. Lehi

Interesting question. Why do you ask? Lehi

I read that, too. But it seems more like Harry Potter's apparation and disapparation, magic, not alternative physics. Lehi

The same is true for almost anything that remotely resembles philosophy: economics, politics, religion, and so on. I have developed what I call "the Iron Law of Humanity": You can tell what any person or group of people want by observing, over time, what they accomplish." There's a similar "law" that tells us that that which a man thinks every day will make him into that thing. Lehi

No one knows exactly. It is my opinion that the reason is that the JST has served its primary purpose. (See 5 below.) Your question is similar to one antis ask frequently: Why don't you (LDSs) use the JST? There are, to my mind, six reasons for this: 1) We don't own the copyright. That belongs to the CoC. We worked for decades to get permission to use a tiny fraction in foot- and end-notes. 2) We don't need it because it's available with the full text from Herald House (the CoC publisher) and the most important changes in our own edition of the AV as foot- and end-notes. 3) Joseph never finished it (which is your question in a different guise). Some claim he did based on a statement that he had. But this statement is open for interpretation, and, more importantly, refuted by Joseph's own acts. He was still working on it a few weeks before his martyrdom. When the RLDS Publication Committee took the "manuscripts" in hand, they found it "bone tiring work" to prepare an engrossed copy for the printer to work from. The translation process changed about the end of Matthew and Genesis. The first had Joseph read from a large, family-style Bible while his scribe wrote word-for-word the text as Joseph read it from the book itself or from revelation. But that took a long time, and God had him change the process so that Joseph read, but the scribe only wrote the changes, while each made marks on the document before him: Joseph in the Bible, the scribe on the transcript. (These symbols were underlinings, dots in pairs or triples or singles, dashes, and so on and matched.) However, as the Publication Committee discovered, it was not clear what these changes meant. As noted above, the Prophet was still working on it right up until his death. This he did by pinning scraps of paper to the manuscript. Again, the meaning wasn't always clear 4) We don't need it for doctrine. We have the Doctrine and Covenants, the Pearl of Great Price, as well as the Book of Mormon to reveal doctrine that has been lost in the Bible. 5) The purpose for the JST was to train Joseph in "prophethoodness". With rare exception, prophets of earlier times had grown up in a culture that knew what a prophet did. They may not have accepted them, but they understood the job description. As Joseph went through the Bible, less hurriedly than he'd done in the Book of Mormon, he could reflect on how Ezra or Moses or Isaiah approached his ministry. 6) God hasn't commanded us to use the JST. We are already "weird enough" with the Book of Mormon, etc., that if we also had a different Bible, our work of spreading the Gospel would be even more difficult, and those who might listen now, might not in such a case. We have a promise that the records of the Jews and of Israel will be available to us at some point. That time is not yet. Patience is a godly virtue. Lehi

It's about an hour south of Salt Lake in light traffic. Lehi

One wonders if these are ever "completed"; even parenting — grandchildren are still a significant "job", and then the "greats". Lehi

Not really trying to derail the topic here, but this illustrates the principle that all laws (and, indeed, all government) are based on (the threat of) lethal force. The case involves traffic misdemeanors, but even a late library fine could result in one's death. All you need do is resist long enough and the state will send armed men with fancy hats and shiny badges and they will kill you. In this case, it seems, as others have noted elsewhere, this woman was actively committing suicide by cop. She used the fact above to her "advantage". The Constitution, according to John Adams, was written for a moral and religious people. It is sufficient, he said, to the governance of no other. 'Tseems to me that we have reached a point where the majority of the people are no longer able to govern themselves and need a strong man to control them. Is this the reason that the Nephites, the Israelites, the Jews, and other nations were destroyed: they couldn't govern themselves, so the Lord brought in people who would do it for them? Lehi

You may have known the answer, but you'd not be the first one to find out he knew only after asking the question of others. It's often a good way to learn, and almost never hypocritical. Lehi

Each has the right to his own thoughts, but I have seen little (that is, "no") evidence of this. Lehi

Hitliary has made a lot of money win or lose, as well. But that's a historical fact, not speculation. So's Bill. And she has been responsible for real dead people. If only the four in Benghazi, that's four too many. But there are far more whose death can't be proven for now. Lehi

Any Gods Who do not "have Priesthood and Godly responsibility over us" do not get our worship. The kind of Gods They are have no godly connection to us. Lehi

Yes to all three. But, I believe it's primarily a lack of faith (or too much faith in the wrong things). This is true. We all suffer from "normalcy bias"*, the idea that everything will continue as it has in the past. (Well, the recent past. Somehow people just don't look very far back. The "Great Depression" wasn't all that long ago, really.) * Some more than others, but no one is wholly immune. We also imagine the government will provide. It may, for a while, but it comes with hooks, large and barbed, and potentially lethal. More concerning, however, is the fact that there is no way this "largess" can possibly do what the state "promises" (but cannot deliver) without stealing from taxpayers today and from the future (our grandchildren and great grandchildren). Even then, it won't last too long. Not even the federal reserve and the government can print money fast enough to "pay" for all of it. "Lifestyle" is a big problem. A boat is a hole in the water one pours money into. Trucks and many other toys focus people on the wrong things, particularly things of no long-term value, things they could do without entirely or put off, or for which substitutes could easily be found. The problem is, one cannot eat "lifestyle". I worked for a man who could tell how much debt a family had just by knowing their income. He'd be right 95% of the time (within about 5%). Most USAans have about four times more debt than income. Mortgages are a large part of it, but car loans, student debt, medical bills, and general debt for refrigerators, carpet, and "home improvements", among a thousand other non-necessities. That's why I worked for this guy. He had a program that could eliminate debt for the average family in 6~7 years. It's not too difficult a process, but it does take mental and spiritual strength; strength that many seem unable to muster. Student loans are now greater than consumer debt in USA (and the bankruptcy law doesn't allow writing them off). May I add a fourth? There are people who think the Church will bail us out. Jess ain't agonna happen, folks. This is one of those things in which we may be placing too much faith. The Church's storage wouldn't last five days, and that only for the people within a dozen or so miles from a storehouse. We have 240,000 bushels of wheat in the Denver storehouse. Cracked and cooked into gruel, not its most appetizing form, to stretch it as far as it would go, three days, tops. Lehi

This. One choice the few recognize is the choice to do nothing. In many cases, it's the best choice. Lehi