anatess2

Duplicate.

Does that also apply to why the record didn't get restored?

@LiterateParakeet @unixknight I see PC as a means to silence somebody or paint them as something bad to make you look good. It's an imposed rule governed by those with the loudest microphone to bring about a desired cultural change that doesn't have much to do with progress but more to do with gaining political advantage. White guy 1: Orientals have almond eyes. White guy 2: Calling them orientals is a derogatory word, therefore, you must really think less of Asians. You are a racist. Asian guy: Oh, hi. I'm Roy Wong, the Oriental representative for the University. How may I help you? White guy 1: You're racist!

I'd say a lot of women would love to not have to be the one who is always right. That would be such a relief to be married to one who agrees with with them 100% of the time.

That would be true if what they're asking for is to ADD a course to diversify. That's not what they want as STATED in the petition. They want to REMOVE the course from required curriculum to DECOLONIZE. Are you also going to complain that the BIBLE have no contributions from anyone but Middle Eastern men so we have to expand it to add the works of <name some black pastor here>? Why or why not? <Caps not used for yelling. it's used for emphasis. I can change it to bold or anything else if you prefer. The caps is the fastest to type.>

This has got to come with a visual.

Sure. I don't read Cosmopolitan. But I don't criticize its articles on lds.net either.

Have you? (I can't believe you called me out on whether I've read the petition... I even read Congressional Bills and Supreme Court Rulings - as you well know having just recently given you one of them -,you think I won't read a 5 paragraph petition?) From the petition: " In particular, we oppose the continued existence of the Major English Poets sequence as the primary prerequisite for further study. <snip> The Major English Poets sequences creates a culture that is especially hostile to students of color. <snip> It’s time for the English major to decolonize — not diversify — its course offerings". We don't STUDY (totally different from just reading) Shakespeare in school simply because it is "good literature". I went to school in the Philippines. Nobody there ever think that Shakespeare is not Filipino! Shakespeare is Shakespeare - he could be blue, red, yellow, green, IT DOESN'T MATTER. There's only one Shakespeare just like there is only one J.K. Rowlings. If we ever add Rowlings on the literature study list, we won't be studying it because it is "good literature". We would study it for Harry Potter's controversial history as well as its impact to the revival of the love of reading in American Middle Schools or something. Just like we study Jane Austen for her unique perspective of the role of women in the Victorian era... Austen could be blue it doesn't matter. What is racist is the position that the value of Shakespearean study should be REMOVED from required curricula BECAUSE he is white. It would be the exact same thing as studying Joseph Smith's D&C holds no value because Smith is white, therefore, Mormons shouldn't be required to study D&C. It is a stupid argument.

Okay guys... We are the Church of the Restoration. The question is still unanswered. Even if Christ's marriage was removed from the Bible, as an important, nay, ESSENTIAL part of the doctrine of Jesus Christ, why was it not restored in the latter days in the same manner that the book of Moses and Abraham were restored? So yeah, we can talk all day about how it's not in the Bible... it still doesn't explain why it is not in our scriptures of the latter days.

Incorrect. It's not IN ADDITION. It is... INSTEAD OF. But, even if it is in addition (which it isn't)... the basic definition of a racist is one who thinks that someone is of less or insufficient value because of the color of their skin. Therefore, thinking that literary study involving the works of William Shakespeare has to be supplemented by W.E.B. Dubois simply because Shakespeare is white is.... yep. Racist.

This. My kids wear their A-shirts and boxer shorts. It doesn't have the sleeves of the garments and shorter on the legs but I've told them they need to wear it as preparatory clothing for garments.

IT IS REQUIRED FOR MALE SERVICE MEMBERS!!! I mean, c'mon, why is it that only the females get to have their private parts inspected yearly, hmmm??? And yeah, you wanna get x-men surgery, you get to have a uterus too and get pregnant.

A lot of people who had premarital intercourse.

He never expressed a NeverTrump sentiment in the same manner that Romney, his running mate, did. Ryan is not a "caving" kind of guy. Rather, he'd negotiate. He is not a fillibuster kind of guy either. He has expressed that negotiation after intense debate has always been the way it worked in Congress until the last 10 years. He says that there are many senators and congressmen right now that hasn't yet experienced how Congress is supposed to work until Ryan got the gears working again. They've never had to take an issue into committee, draft a bill, stalwartly defend the bill on the floor, negotiate amendments, and bring it to vote for it to make to law without attaching pork packages to buy the votes. Pelosi and Boehner as well as Reid and McCollum has choked this process so that the only ones to go on the floor are those that clearly die (to blackmark the other party as obstructionists) or clearly pass (to cheer their party's effectiveness). The ones that get debated are those that can be used to boost re-election campaigns. Things you want to pass gets hidden in pork to attach to these other ones. Say what you will about Bill Clinton but the Clinton-Gingrich team was actually a very successful one.

I don't know if Shakespeare is applicable "at work". It's kinda like bad joojoo to talk bad about a workmate who passed away. I had a boss that was not very good. She passed away and everybody remembers her as being quite good... or at least, that's what they publicly say... I had a workmate that would walk into work after a lunch break smelling of alcohol and proceed to fall asleep at his desk (oooh... I'm talking bad about him, bad joojoo!). He passed away and nobody mentions that anymore. They just remember how good a programmer he was (which he was, that's why he kept his job).

I disagree. Ryan represents the 2nd branch of government. He does not have to agree with the executive branch even if it is his own party. He has done a lot of work shaping up Congress to push his idea of a Republican agenda waiting for a time when he could present it to a POTUS that would be open to signing them to law. This is the balance of power that is guaranteed by the design of the Constitution. It's not gonna happen with Obama. It's not gonna happen with Hillary. At this point, Ryan has 2 choices: Trump or stay neutral. Both choices are completely fine and he can defend it in his re-election bid as Wisconsin was Cruz country. What is presenting him with trouble against Nehlen is his signing of the omnibus which was a Boehner time-bomb that caused Boehner to abdicate his throne. It has not much to do with the Trump campaign. But yes, Ryan and Trump are completely opposed on some things, disagree with other things, and agree on other things as follows: 1.) Social Security and Medicare (a Ryan wonky pet project) - they disagree with changing main portions of this entitlement. Ryan believes this entitlement's funding needs to be shored up through austere cutting measures such as raising the retirement age and privatizing portions of it. Trump believes it needs benefits needs to be left alone but that it needs to be managed properly to reduce waste, fraud, and abuse. He also believes funding for SS will be taken care of by a robust economy. Trump also believes the government should directly negotiate with drug companies on the price of drugs. Ryan is opposed to this. 2.) Foreign policy - very opposed. Ryan sides with the Bush doctrine, Trump does not. 3.) Eminent Domain - very opposed. Ryan actively legislated an anti-Eminent Domain bill. Trump is pro-Eminent Domain. 4.) Trade - very opposed. Ryan is completely pro-TPP, Trump is completely against it. 5.) Immigration - disagrees with major portions of it. Ryan is pro-legalization actively writing legislation to that effect. Trump is pro-deportation. They both agree on border security and "the wall". Things they agree on: Okay, I cut and pasted these from the results of the meeting between Trump and Ryan... they are Trump's proposals that Ryan (and most Republicans) either agrees with or is flexible on: Repeal Obamacare in its entirety. Enact legislation that creates a national health insurance market. (Anatess note: Ryan already has this in committee). Expand health savings accounts. (Anatess note: Ryan already has this in committee). Mandate price transparency in health care and medication. (Anatess note: Ryan already has this in committee). De-fund Planned Parenthood so long as it performs abortions. Prohibit federal funding for or review of state curriculum mandates and tests, which helped nationalize Common Core. Authorize funding for a border wall, including provisions for alternative funding, such as levies against remittances to Mexico. Triple the number of Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers. Mandate nationwide E-verify. De-fund sanctuary cities. Raise the prevailing wage paid to H-1Bs to make U.S. citizens competitive. Increase standards for admitting refugees and asylum-seekers, including stronger background checks. Pause in issuing green cards until U.S. citizen unemployment improves. End birthright citizenship, i.e. no more “anchor babies.” Allow veterans to use Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) benefits to purchase private health care from any doctor or care facility that accepts Medicare. Increase funding for VA treatment of post-traumatic stress disorder. Increase VA funding for job training and placement services for veterans Fund OB/GYN services at all VA hospitals. Simplify the tax code consistent with Trump’s proposals. Eliminate all income taxes on singles making $25,000 or less, and on all married couples making $50,000 or less. Enact legislation for a one-time repatriation of corporate cash held overseas, with repatriated funds to be taxed at 10 percent and no other penalty. Enact a 15 percent maximum business tax, for corporate tax as well as small businesses and freelancers. Eliminate the death tax. Enforce the Second Amendment by ending gun and magazine bans. Enforce the Second Amendment by requiring states to put criminal and mental health records onto background check system. Enforce the Second Amendment by enacting a national right-to-carry law, with permits to be valid in all 50 states. Authorize the Keystone Pipeline. (Anatess note: Ryan already has this in committee). Provide for an initial round of funding for new infrastructure construction and repair. As you can see, they are not "on different sides of the fence". But, having a Congress that is a "Yes Man" to the POTUS will give you another round of the follies of a Congress being "Yes Man" to George W. Bush that gave us Medicare Part D, destructive Trade agreements, a bloated federal government with massive debt, the Iraq War, and an invasive global social engineering effort (yeah, install democracy in Palestine and they'll put Hamas in power, duh), among others. Ryan endorsing Trump for what they can agree on and still reserve his opposition to things they don't agree on will prove to be a better balance of power for the USA and proves Ryan's commitment to a working government.

Yes. I don't know if @Jane_Doe would like to be 18 again, though.

I still don't understand why USmericans, after LeSellers explained why he uses that terminology, bothers people. I don't understand why Oriental bothers people. I'm Filipino and I call myself Oriental. I understand why Feminist bothers people. Feminist is one of those words that has gotten hijacked by anti-feminist women who believe they're feminists.

My understanding: Jesus may have married, Jesus may have not during his mortal ministry. There is no record and there is no revelation one way or the other. My take on this is that he did not marry during his mortal ministry. Logic: He was baptized to fulfill all righteousness. He did not need the saving ordinance of Baptism because He is already God. He got baptized because it is a requirement for our salvation, therefore, he got baptized to fulfill all righteousness. Marriage is not a requirement for salvation. Rather, it is a requirement for exaltation. Jesus is already God. This leads me to believe that he is already married in the pre-existence before he offered his atoning sacrifice to the Father. It is, therefore, not necessary for him to get married even as he taught and preached the marital covenant and its eternal importance.

What the what??? Mormons are more pro-life than Catholics? Ugh. The American Catholic Church is going... down down down down....

I just hired a woman to clean my bathrooms off of Craiglist... great woman! Cheap too!

Hopefully, you're not Labor either!

Show proof.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/jun/2/yale-students-white-male-writers-hostile-culture/ Sorry Shakespeare. You're white. You offend the colored folks.

Unless he offered to buy the product and made arrangements for pick-up you are under no obligation to not sell it to someone else. So you can answer 20 callers about the product and sell it to 1. Thereby only needing to answer the next questions with - it's already sold. So, yeah, I don't quite get why you felt you needed to ignore the questions instead of just saying you already sold it to end the conversation.