Mike

I think I don't a problem with anything you just wrote. I especially don't have a problem with you saying what you think about it (or, haha, anyone else disagreeing).

I agree that you shouldn't be forced to watch what you don't want to watch. (That's why i took care to say that my remark wasn't directed *at* anyone. ) As for me, I'll take smiles where I can get them. And this world is so full of tragedy that I personally think it makes me a better man to be able to empathize to the degree that empathy has meaning for me personally without regard to what it means to someone else. I've got time.

Ditto on trying to follow and love. The cartoon version was sufficient for me, but if a friend invited me to the live action version I wouldn't have a problem seeing it. As far as marriage goes ... well, that's another thread

I watched a couple episodes of Will and Grace--the comedy made me smile and laugh. I saw Brokeback Mountain--the tragedy made me frown and cry. I don't direct this at anyone. It's just for anyone who happens to care, or anyone who can relate to the emotions.

I'm not sure I need to post a disclaimer but just in case: my remark regarding the video shouldn't be construed to mean that I was drawing a connection between what the video portrayed and homosexuality in any way.

Interesting example. Thanks for indulging me.

Aside from your point about "LGBTQRX" or matters of morality, beliefs, etc., have you observed this phenomenon or had it happen to you, yourself? (I realize I'm off-topic here, but it merely interested me on a personal level as a sort of spring-board toward introspection.)

I'm fascinated by this video and the claims it makes. I don't know that I've ever experienced something this pronounced. ???

Still thinking about this. I'm interested in your opinion about why what you observe might be the case, I mean aside from lifestyles that you mentioned which are antithetical to the LDS lifestyle.

That's very interesting. My missionary experience was also in Brazil. It was just the opposite.

How refreshing. You mean with people like me, hahaha?

I have come to believe that more than by precept the changed hearts have come largely from Church members who received opportunities to live outside the bubbles they and their parents were raised in such as missionaries returning from countries where they actually lived with and learned to love people who were different from themselves.

@Vort Thanks. I like that. I reminds me of my duty, and it reinforces my hope for myself.

@wenglund I can picture the Lord thumping me on the side of the head and telling me to pursue my discipleship and allow my brother the same privilege. In that spirit I'll retain your invitation to participate where I see fit, while allowing you to carry on with you objective. I don't want to come across as pedantic and I don't want to be like the disciples who quibbled while perhaps neglecting weightier matters. Thanks for your civility and acceptance of my small contribution. As always, I wish you well

(I added the underscore above.) Rather than considering something such as Gravity as a basis for arguing that racial equality, for example, defies the natural order of things I submit that we ought to consider the above as a basis for arguing that racial equality is part of the natural order of things. The phrase "all are alike unto God" ought in my mind to settle the question of how much emphasis should placed on the so-called notion of equality. It should be obvious that God, Himself, doesn't commit what to me is a human fallacy of equivocation by presuming to argue that people are not identical and therefore not equal and should not emphasize equality. Coupled with the statement by the drawers of the Declaration of Independence that all men are created equal we have a firm foundation for combining the spiritual and the temporal in terms of pursuing the ideal of equality. In my opinion, the only thing we ought to be analyzing is what laws and practices have we rightfully abandoned (such as slavery); and what laws and practices yet need to be considered, tweaked, tuned, abandoned, etc. In such an analysis I feel it's useless to focus on which Party (Republican or Democrats) or which groups of Citizens (the left, the right, etc., etc.) or which President is guilty of what. Instead we ought to discuss how this or that program, practice, regulation, procedure, etc. does or doesn't help us to fulfill the Spirit of the Law. I think the saying about throwing out the baby with the bath water is useful to keep in mind.

@wenglund SInce you tell me that you do invite discussion for the sake of understanding, I want to accept the invitation. I have disagreements with some things in the entire post which contains the quote above. But I want to focus there first. So you begin with this mention of the Law of Gravity as a foundation for your claim. From the way you describe it I suppose you refer to the Newtonian explanation of Gravity. But I have a problem from the get go because you handle it as if you think it's a law akin to laws passed by governments, or perhaps to Divine Commandments. It's nothing of the kind. It's really just a useful explanation to understand what's going on in nature and not in human behavior. To utilize words and phrases like "respecter of persons", "care", "treats", "end goal", and "intent" is erroneous because you speak as though those human emotions and behaviors are attributes of Gravity, and thus you mischaracterize it grossly in my opinion. Moreover, it seems to me that you are taking different meanings and uses of words like law, equal, equality and treating them as though they have the same meanings or that it's alright to use them interchangeably. This won't do at all. When you write that Gravity is a law that treats everyone equally I submit that you mischaracterize further. I'm left to guess that you refer to a hugely massive object like Earth exerting the same gravitational force on all less massive objects, but you omit the key additional aspect that less massive objects exert their own gravitational forces upon the Earth which is the reason that a marble and a bowling ball, for example, appear to be "treated equally". But again there is no equal treatment going on. So as a foundation on which to build conclusions about the human perception of social equality, racial equality, or whatever term we might agree to stick with it fails for me. An analogy such as this where you compare natural phenomena to human concepts about human relations and interaction lacks sufficient similarities to serve as a valid comparison. It offers even less to go forward with, claiming that the phenomena are sufficiently similar in order to say "the same is true, to some extent, for the laws of God...". The explanation of Gravity is totally not the same at all as God's Laws.

There are so many ways to suffer in this life. And every time I feel badly for myself about the opposition I'm up against I am reminded of someone else whose suffering is worse than mine.

I have mixed feelings about thinking of God as the ultimate anything in terms of human pursuits, if you know what I'm trying to say. I used to think of God as the ultimate scientist, ultimate artist, ultimate musician, etc. But at the moment I wonder if that might be the wrong way for me to imagine Him. I used to think some day (in Heaven) I will be able to learn and in turn comprehend all the mathematics that gave me difficulties here in this life. Right now I wonder if mathematics to God is as beside the point as playing pirates as I did at age 6 is to me now. I do it with my six-year old grandson because playing together makes us both happy. But it isn't relevant otherwise to what I'm about. I wonder if the most complex physics to us might be as irrelevant to God in creating an Earth as tying a shoe lace is to one who lives barefoot on a warm gentle beach. ... or, I may be wrong.

@wenglund I asked you to explain how racial equality gets in the way of gospel progression and may degrade one's spiritual faith. I was disappointed that instead you gave me a "fixed" version of my question which doesn't really work for me. I think I know why you did this because your short answer was just a re-write of your "fixed"question. So, I think I already know what your long answer will be like. But I read your blog, and I'll certainly read your posts to come. Thank you for tolerating my interruptions of what you wanted to accomplish with the OP. All my best.

How is this perspective new? It sounds a lot like the way the US has traditionally approached countries with human rights violations (or anti-democratic regimes, drug lords, etc.) because said countries had something else the US wanted more than respect for human rights (or democracy, rule of law). Whether it's right, wrong, pragmatic, short-sighted, etc., isn't my point. My point is merely that it isn't new.

I meant that it's irrelevant to what I was talking about. I don't see why I should be concerned what a Communist thinks about the Mormon doctrine of varied degrees of glory any more than what a Baptist thinks about it, for example. That's all I meant.

The only times (I'm pretty sure) I used the word 'equal' in this thread were quoting a phrase from the Declaration of Independence and referring to the Savior. Mr. Vujicic and I are equal(s) in that we are both beloved children of a Heavenly Father, we both need, want, and deserve to love and be loved and to strive to be happy, we both face adversity and opposition here, and we both need a helping hand, aid, assistance from other people in order to thrive and to succeed to the degrees we have. Without elaborating I feel confident this encompasses my understanding of what it means that Man is created equal. Perhaps you can tease out more detail from me if you think it is important.

I'll be anticipating your explanation hoping for emphasis on the parts of my question I placed in quotation marks. Thanks.

So, in my interest to avoid continuing to misunderstand you, would you explain further about the way "racial equality" gets "in the way of gospel progression" and may "even erroneously degrade one's spiritual faith"?

Duly noted.