JohnsonJones

TBH, I think the much more concerning thing is the adultery. I find it remarkable that she stuck it out with her husband and already speaks about her incredibly wonderful character. IF he is sinking back into old habits, FAR more than pornography, I would be worried about adultery. Personally, no matter what the excuse, I just can't see any reason that could excuse that.

to clarify, though there is a significant difference between the Chinese and Us plans in one area. China, as opposed to the US, is communist, so even though they have some capitalism allowed these days, they are still very much communist and hence, those who would get a third child normally are those who have higher government connections and hence higher benefits and may be able to afford the penalties. In China, they would start losing the deductions they have already in regards to the family if they have more than one child (two children now if you qualify for that) in the past, while also having a stiff penalty added. The proposed US plan doesn't have a penalty attached at least. The Chinese plan HAS been seen as something that has adversely affected those who are religious still (not an easy thing to do in Red China, but there are pockets, and at times there have even been LDS service missionaries there). To those you single people, thanks already...you are already subsidizing our large families (7 kids), and theirs as well if you analyze the tax system today. AS kids left the house I seemed to pay more and more, though overall, my food expenses and such went down. (paying off a home and NOT getting another mortgage on it is ALSO a big plus in finances, probably a much bigger impact than taxes have been to be honest).

No, it means that each family gets a standard deduction in addition to those earning the wage. From what I understand from various news sources (and it's still a little hard to work out) The wage earner gets one deduction, from what I understand, then the household itself gets an automatic dual deduction, which means for a family of two workers, they would get a total of four deductions. That's it and standard across the board. If you have one child, but both work, you still get a bigger deduction. IF you have two children, you'll hit even with what happens now in taxes. If you have three children, your taxes will go up. One worker + spouse = 3 deduction Two workers = 4 deductions Two workers + one child = 4 deductions Two workers + 2 children = 4 deductions Two workers + 3 children = 4 deductions Two workers + 4 children = 4 deductions Two workers + 5 children = 4 deductions Two workers + 6 children = 4 deductions Thus, those with few children will have a higher reduction in their taxes, but those with more than two children will see their taxes go up. Bascially, its very similar to the China's population control plan, but phrased differently, probably to appeal to US citizens or something.

The question Trump should be asking is NOT the one he IS asking. It doesn't matter if Ward is more Trump than Flake, it doesn't matter if Republicans like her more than Flake, what matters is IF SHE CAN ACTUALLY GET ELECTED. Flake has shown election capability, Ward has not. If Flake leaves, and Ward goes to the election, and loses to a democrat, that's basically Trump sabotaging his own congress. In essence, getting a democrat in the place of Flake is hurting the Republican party and the Republican Congress. Of course, at this point, with the Congress no repealing the ACA, and basically doing nothing in regards to morality or any other supposed Republican ideal, one has to ask, what really is the difference between having Republicans or Democrats in there. AT least a democrat congress got things done. Overall, I suspect while Republicans have had a short term victory, that Trumps antics are going to hand Congress over to the Democrats in the next four years (and possibly the presidency after that unless a miracle happens with the Republicans)...but we'll see over time what really happens or not.

So, I've heard quite a bit about Trump's new proposed Tax Plan (or is that some of the Republican in Congress along with Trump?). On the face of it, the media has made it sound all nice and dandy, but there is a hidden thing in it (or not so hidden if you've heard all about it) that is very political, and in fact could hurt Mormon and Catholic families more than most. Before getting to that, let me talk about Red China briefly, from what I understand. For years, China, in an effort to curb their population growth had a one child policy. In essence, you were allowed one child. If you wanted a second child, you had to pay a lot more taxes. A third child was illegal without government approval, but if you were allowed, you better be filthy rich, because your taxes would be excessively high. IN essence, they utilized taxes on families with children as a way to control the population. So, how does that lie in the Tax proposals of the administration now. Their proposal would allow families a double deduction. That sounds good on the surface...right? Except, as I understand it, if you have more than two children...that deduction stays the same. You do not get any more of a deduction. Therefore, you will have higher taxes after this supposed tax reduction, than you did previously. Now, of my kids, all of them (which are married, one son isn't, he'd actually benefit from this tax change) have at least four kids themselves. Some have more than four children. This means, this new tax, will hit my family much harder than most. It actually could be seen as penalizing them, simply because they have more children. In essence, this new tax will hit Mormon and Catholic families (which tend to have more children than most others from what I've seen) very hard. If we relay back to the China principle, basically you use taxes to control how many children your families are having. I see that this tax can accomplish the same thing in the US, it means that it's trying to restrict the US to a two child principle (which is, ironically, the same principle China now has, as it loosened the strictures on it's child policy recently). How is this a Republican ideal? In fact, I'd think this was antithetical to Republicans and Conservatives in general. Now, the tax itself, could be seen as a political move in other ways. It proposes cutting out the state tax reduction. Now these taxes are typically higher in liberal states...which are seen as not having voted for Trump or Republicans in general. This means, they gain more taxes from these people, without supposedly hurting their base. At the same time, there is an idea that lower income families tend to have more children, as well as those one welfare and those in the ghetto areas of major metropolises. These are also seen as not having voted for Republicans...and hence, they gain a LOT more money from these individuals (if they can, I don't believe welfare is normally taxed, but those who are just low income, but high enough to pay taxes still, will be punished by a higher tax) without actually hurting the Republican voting base as well...at least in theory. In reality, from what I saw, a majority of Clinton's votes came from five urban areas (which also are some of the biggest cities in the US). The rest went to Trump, which means that Trump actually WILL be hurting his base (and he barely won last time, it was closer than most Trumpites would admit). I also don't think it's going to be benefiting the Republicans as much as they think it will. Mormons are very Republican, as are the more devout catholics (the ones that tend to have larger families, those that disregard Catholic dogma and doctrine tend to lean more democrat from what I've seen). In addition, there are some evangelicals that also have larger families, and he would be punishing these, which are also his base. However, I think overall, they are not looking at this aspect but still thinking that these new taxes will hurt those who would not vote for them anyways, but help those that do vote for Republicans and conservatives. Overall, I think the tax is going to cause many Mormons to pay higher taxes, as well as evangelicals and devout Catholics. I also see it as the same idea that China established with it's higher taxes if you have more children...a form of population control...just no one (that I've seen) has come right out and stated this yet.

It's not a bad thing for a US president to express their opinion. Most of the time the reasons they were elected were BECAUSE certain opinions and political stances they held. It's not that one expresses an opinion, but HOW they express that opinion.

This conversation sounds pretty bizarre. I suppose this may be how it feels when non-members listen to LDS members discuss very Mormony topics at times.

True, I wasn't trying to justify celebrities either, just come up with a reason why people may listen to them rather than a doctor. Obviously I still go to my doctors, but sometimes I wonder if I would be better trying to find the answers to some of my aches and pains (never get old...you get pain where you never thought you would) on my own.

I had a doctor once that when I asked him a question on things that he didn't know the answer to, he went to his electronic medical encyclopedia and typed things in to look them up. The only difference between him and other doctors I expect is that he was blatantly open about it, whereas I think others may say... "I need to consult some materials and think about this and will get back with you, can you come back in a week if this medication doesn't work or you don't see an improvement" Type statement. Eventually, beyond just your normal everyday pains and aches, you start to get the idea as you get older that your doctor may know some things...but on other things they are just as much in the dark as you. When they order tests and such, that's when they start to really get an idea (and where their education can help out beyond normal folks) when they get results from those test, but prior to that, sometimes they are shooting in the dark. At least, from what I've seen occasionally. Even if you come right out and tell them your problem sometimes, it's like they didn't even hear you.

Okay, I understand the Magic part (it's a collectible card game some kids play), but the rest of your statement might as well be gibberish for all I understood on what you wrote there. LOL.

I'm not certain of the conversation (was this a conversation you had with someone?), but ΔHf = V+1/2B+IEM+EAX+UL but Why that led to the conversation as it did, I do not know, and in fact, in regards to enthalpy it is only used in purely ionic compounds in regards to lattice enthalpy specifically. This really doesn't have much to do with Thermodynamics per se, unless you are a chemist. If one is wearing the shirt, I'd imagine it is dealing with one who is a physicist, in which case they probably have no idea why you'd be asking about the Born-Haber cycle in relation to Thermodynamics, UNLESS you were asking in regards to entropy vs. energy...etc...etc...etc. By the way, I'm not a physicist, I'm a historian. I did NOT get an A in chemistry all those years ago when I took it. As I said, I don't get the post above...is it supposed to be a joke, or is this an incident that happened? Sorry, it probably went over my head.

There are people that are super serious about Monopoly!? I really enjoy boardgames and collect some, but I don't get really serious about them. Well, I suppose at one point I did play chess somewhat competitively (was on the chess team decades ago in High School. At the time, chess teams were almost like another sports team...don't know if that still goes on today, but my impression is that it does not), so I suppose I could understand it from that viewpoint. I'm not sure I'd classify D&D as the greatest game ever. I might list that as chess or maybe for those from the East, Go (which I think is a form of Chinese Chess, but vastly different than the chess we play or think about in the US normally).

And now, I can release the punchline. Well, not so much a punchline, but that I was leading you on...in a weird humor sort of way. I found out far more than Jack Chick's tracts. They don't really represent the D&D gamers at all, and are basically seen as a bad joke these days. I actually found out that many seem to find humor in them though. I know all D&D really is, is sort of like the make believe that we used to do as kids, but with rules. Sort of like when I played Cowboys and Indians (actually, it was normally just Cowboys and Cowboys since no one wanted to play the Indians unless it was a little brother who we coerced into doing so) when we were younger, but with rules and such that make it so that we can't have the disagreements of things like...I shot you...no you didn't...etc. It's also tends to be cooperative, and takes place in a fantasy setting. It's not taken literally or that seriously by the players, and they play it just like we would play any other game (though there are some that are far more serious about it than others, it being more of a serious hobby for them, than just another boardgame). See...I know a little about your hobby now. Obviously not everything, but somewhat about it.

More seriously though, there is some truth and some falsity. In regards to Masturbation, the LDS church is growing to be more singular in it's approach to it. It is true, scripturally, there really is NO basis in the church's standing. If we take a secular look, it started with a craze from the 19th century and quack science. That quackery grew into something accepted in many religions of the time. However, that medical quackery had no substance that is actually found in the Bible. However, we, as LDS, believe that it is tampering with the laws of chastity and things that should be held sacred. On the otherhand, Pornography is something almost every Christian religion has been against. Pornography has been around in some form for thousands of years, and during that time, Christianity has always been against it. This is something that is very much within our American heritage (due to the Christian background, even today, many nations in Europe consider Americans very puritanical...even with how much more lax we've become in that arena). It finds it's root in Matthew 5:28 where the Lord states If one is looking at pornography, it is almost definite that they have certain emotions in his heart. If one is masturbating, many times that same thing can also be stated in addition to the act that they are doing. So, I would actually contest the view that pornography is considered a normal and healthy thing in our society today. I think many have tried to create that illusion, but I think there are MANY in the US that would disagree with that assessment, that in fact, pornography is a terrible thing that plagues our society today. I think LDS may actually take a lesser stance against it (despite what some think, the LDS church thus far, hasn't overly aggressively punished those who have committed this sin, at least as much as some may think it does). There are other Christians that take this FAR more seriously than even the LDS church. I think every evangelical Christian religion, and most of the others do NOT view Pornography as normal or healthy.

I've done some research on this since you guys talked about this stuff some weeks ago. There's this tract by this guy called Jack Chick or something. Is it true that you believe you have actual powers the same as your characters. Was his story on Black Leaf based on a real life event. What a tragic story. What level are you up to? How does casting spells work and can you really justify that with being LDS? Kind of a weird hobby, feels almost like mysticism and evil. How many kill themselves each year when their characters die? Do you guys really wear cloaks and such in really weird ceremonies? Did you cry for Black Leaf?

Normally at the bigger competitions (or almost always at the county fair and state fair) if you win a ribbon you'll be able to sell right there at the fair to someone. It's normally been fairly easy on that front for our 4-h kids around our area. I suppose you could try the local plants or processing yards perhaps...not sure with chickens though, my experience was more with cattle.

I looked it up just to make sure I remembered right. The SLC Tribune has a long tradition of being a little antagonistic to the church. It's founding was originally be individuals were were excommunicated/former members of the LDS church. They were not exactly happy with many of the doings of the LDS church. The paper has continued much of this tradition throughout the decades (and over a century) of it's printing. Obviously it employs members of the LDS church at times, and so it's antagonism at times is muted, but at other times it is quite prevalent. A reading of the comments section of the SLC Trib online at times have brought out some of the most vile commentary you'll ever read in relation to the LDS church. In some ways, it is also the readership the continues this tradition. In some ways having opposite points of view can be useful (which is probably part of the historian in me coming out). That way you don't see it from one extreme or the other (and I feel you are correct, the Tribune tends to lean more liberal than other media from Utah at times, which provides an acutely needed counterpoint to the happenings in Utah). I tend to read the news from two or three different sources normally to try to get a more full view of the story and what actually occurred if possible. Hence, I have read the SLC tribune often after reading the same story elsewhere. From what I've read recently, it appears it was purchased by the Huntsman family, or they were seeking to purchase it. I don't think that has affected the readership thus far, but perhaps over time it may affect how certain stories are written.

I don't know how all of them do it, but I LOVE how some of the Baptist talk about being called. Many Baptists, unlike the Mormons, believe the LORD directly leads the congregation and the calling of leaders, rather than leaving it via men. Therefore, when you are called to the work, the LORD calls you to the work. They can feel it in their hearts and they are called to Preach the gospel. This is why they have so many independent churches, all of which they feel is possible to be directly led by the Lord, rather than of men. They can be united in some groups (for example, the Southern Baptist Convention), but each leader is supposed to have a direct relationship with the Lord. They have a similar idea of repentance and salvation, where it is the Lord who directly touches your heart and changes it, so that you follow him and your desire to sin ceases. So, to contrast, in the LDS teaching, the Lord inspires our leaders to call those who going to serve via revelation. In the Baptist religion, from what I understand, the Lord calls the individual directly, no other individual is needed. This means there is a more orderly hierarchy/leadership chain in the LDS church where in the Baptist religion it is more composed of independent churches. I can't say I believe in the Baptist religion or theology, but it is an interesting theology from what I understand. It isn't just the LDS that believe in inspiration from heaven, I think the Baptist (and probably some other religions) have a deep belief in very similar things.

Kolob? How vast is the planet? I do not know the answer to all things. In regards to Abraham's translation, we do not know exactly how it was translated. It could be that a single symbol in the manuscript has double or triple meanings. One that the world understands, and another which may be far more lengthy in regards to what prophets understand.

Just_A_Guy covers what I've heard and it makes sense. In today's age where I've also heard one could simply download it, I personally do not know why it isn't available to the general church public. They already have handbook 2 out there (which is basically the same idea). The other thing I've seen, though this is more personal opinion, is that some people when they utilize handbook 2 and would with handbook 1, is to see it more as doctrine or something akin to doctrine rather than guidelines for leaders. They see the handbooks as something that the church is supposed to follow like the Four Standard works. Unfortunately, this is something that is ingrained in some individuals as they see it at other places where handbooks of instructions (Such as their workplace) are in use. It is to avoid this appearance that the handbooks are the doctrine that we follow in the church, and it is in truth, the Scriptures and the guidance of the General Authorities that dictate what we do and how we live our lives. In my opinion...

So, if I understand you right, you feel as if you missed out on things because you got married young and then had children at a young age as well, but never participated in what the world sometimes calls...fun. It's been a while, and they do hit upon this in Young Single Adults which you missed, but it sounds almost like you are experiencing temptation from what we would call peer pressure. It may not be the same peer pressure that you have from friends asking you to do things, but the type of peer pressure where you see things of the world and how they portray it as fun for young people...and you say...gosh...that looks fun. I sure think I missed out by not doing that. This is just another form of temptation. I've been unfortunate (though some wouldn't see as such, it really is to me) to serve in leadership positions where I've had people confess things to me. It is never fun. It is never enjoyable. As much as people say it, in this situation there really is basically two kinds of people. The first have no regrets. They have no desire to repent. They tasted of the world and loved it. They want to continue doing this. They normally either stop coming to church (which is the most typical thing that occurs), or even worse get excommunicated or ask for their names to be removed. This is a very sad situation when it happens. The second are remorseful. They literally wish they had NEVER DONE THIS IN THE FIRST PLACE. They regret that they fell into temptation. If they could tell you one thing, it probably would be...DON'T DO IT. Stop wondering about it while you are ahead. No matter how fun it may appear, no matter how much you think you missed out...DON'T DO IT. It is not worth it. The painful road to recovery, the painful memories and how it has impacted their lives is something that they would well have wanted to do without. If the entire world decided it was cool to point a gun to their head and pull the trigger...would you do it. The result if it was loaded being that you would seriously be injured. The rest of your life you would bear the scars, even if it didn't kill you. The rest of the world says it's absolutely fun, the thrill is something you can never experience if you don't try it at least once. You see how cool it is in TV, movies, and every other form of media. 90% of the rest of the world, and even 20% of Mormons have done this. Would you therefore want to put a loaded gun to your head and pull the trigger? Even if you survive, you still would have the scars for the rest of your life. Something there would remind you of what you did in your past. Now, the lord would restore all that was lost. In the next life, it would be as if it never occurred, but in this life, there still will be reminders of what happened. What you are proposing in some ways is to do that spiritually. You have seen how fun it seems from TV and media and other sources to get that spiritual gun and point it at your head. This is what peer pressure, or the temptation of the world can do to a person. A normal LDS saint will say...What are you thinking! Do you realize the harm you can do to yourself? It seems crazy, and yet, that's the type of spiritual temptation which may lead to spiritual suicide is doing. Instead of analyzing your life from the world's perspective, look at it from reality. Hopefully you have a good marriage with children. Take joy in the children and your family and realize...that's what is really important. You got to experience something that others are actually envious of most likely. I will share one story of two daughters. There was the older one and the younger one. The older daughter was VERY talented. She had a great ability on the Violin, made straight A's in school, and got a full ride scholarship. The Younger daughter was very jealous of the older daughter. She thought the older daughter was blessed with everything. That everyone loved the older daughter, and that the older daughter was so talented that she was able to do all these things that the younger daughter could never dream of. The older sister had a ton of praise from the world. However, the secret was that the older daughter was actually jealous of the younger daughter. The Younger daughter got married very soon after graduating high school to her recently returned missionary sweetheart. She could not understand her older sister's reaction in some ways. The Older sister had felt isolated at times from friends and others. All her friends were gathered from those who hung around with her younger sister. Her younger sister was considered very beautiful and charismatic, and while the older sister was not married, the younger sister got married rather quickly. She then had children. The Older daughter knew the importance of family and children, and wished that she could have the blessings the younger sister had. She didn't get married until she was near 25 (which is actually still young in today's standards), but was jealous of her sister's blessings. It was irony that both were jealous of the other. They both had blessings that they each could enjoy. Rather than listen to their father that they were both loved tremendously and each were blessed of the Lord in their own way, they took to looking at the other one's life and feeling that they were lacking in something. They should have realized the blessings they had in being righteous and following the Lord, and enjoy the things that he blessed them with, instead of looking at things that they didn't have and wanting that instead. Today, (I hope at least) it appears they've made peace and realized that they both were very blessed in their lives. It took a while though, and their jealousy was something that if they had shed it and learned to enjoy what the Lord had blessed them with, they could have avoided years of jealousy, pain, and at times, harsh treatment of each other. All that envy and coveting is wasted time. How much better to enjoy what you have now, and the great blessings you enjoy. It is a blessing to be pure, it is something that very few in this world can actually enjoy. It is something much more special than all that alcohol, gambling, or any other detriments that may tempt you. Remain clean, and learn to love the blessings that you have been given rather than fall to the temptations of the world that give the illusion of fun, but in reality will only attempt to destroy the blessings you have now.

Actually, it was 23% which is better than many elections on various levels in the US in general. We are going to disagree on this my friend and I can see this is going to go nowhere. I'm with them in their desire for statehood. You aren't. It's that simple. I think they deserve recognition and the ability to vote for the President (which, I expect Trump will strongly NOT want as he is not exactly very popular in P.R. at the moment due to some of his statements and actions). You do not. We could go back and forth and back and forth on this, but I know you never change your positions, and I'm not going to change mine on this so, let's end this amicably and agree that on this, we are going to disagree.

What do you mean by being naughty? And why would you want to ditch the Molly Mormon identity? You might not see this, but Molly Mormons are actually rather unique and special. Outside of the LDS church, those who are "naughty" are a dime a dozen...in fact, more like a thousand a penny. Is it a desire to be just like everyone else that is miserable in the US and the rest of the world today? Remember, the grass always seems greener on the other side of the fence, but normally, it's either the same grass or worse (normally, in farmland bordering wilderness, the grass on the otherside of the fence may actually be worse or even harmful). There are some in the church that do not realize how unique being good really is, or how being righteous actually makes someone truly stand out and is a very special quality in relation to what the world is like now. So many think that they are all alike if they are good, but that is not true, something they find out many times to their great sorry. More times than not, it's more that they say they are similar to others, but in reality just want to be like the rest of the world, that thousand per penny individuals that are "naughty" and disobey the commands of the lord flagrantly. that said How naughty are you talking about? Playing games and stuff on the Sabbath? Watching bad movies? Drinking coffee, smoking cigarettes, or that like? Breaking the law of chastity? Robbing a bank? Going on a murdering spree? Some are far worse than others. Most of them lead to deep sorrow later, and disappointment that they wanted to follow the world rather than what they knew was right. A few may not, but many of those bring a sense of being part of the world, but then guilt and sadness for multiple reasons. They realize just how special and unique they were previously, and they destroyed that. They realize that what they thought would be fun, actually may have seemed fun at the time, but destroyed a lot of long lasting happiness and in some cases, even lost some freedom they took for granted. When you say naughty...what exactly do you mean by that and why do you think you are feeling that way?

It was not boycotted. That's an absurd statement from someone who probably didn't even know it happened (From your previous statement you made). AS I said, they've voted for statehood consistently from 2012. The turnout was so low last time, for several reasons. Number 1 is probably because, they had a good turnout for 2012...and other votes for statehood have had large turnouts. Every single one of them have been ignored by the US congress. After 5 years, there comes a point that people start to wonder if anyone is ever going to listen to them and if it's worth saying it over and over and over and over and over and over again while being ignored. Secondly, there was some contesting of the language of the questions. It was seen as if they were trying to twist it so people accidentally voted for independence, and there was no commonwealth option if people chose to vote for that, which was then added I believe at the last minute, but poorly worded as well. From how you didn't even know that the Puerto Ricans were voting for statehood I think you don't really know much about the issue (considering your last mistaken statement prior to this), but are trying to color it with your own bias. The biggest barrier to statehood is not Puerto Ricans, but the US congress not wanting to grant statehood to Puerto Rico. They've given every excuse under the moon (and now it's them saying it's the 70 billion dollar debt...when compared to what the US govt. spends normally anways...that's a drop in the bucket...heck if the US govt is willing to help out California in their budgetary problems...it should be a no brainer to help PR). The Hurricane hitting hasn't helped at all, but Puerto Rico WANTS statehood. It's the US govt (and possibly people with the same attitude as you've exhibited that try to paint P.R. as expressing opinions the exact opposite of what is prevalent currently in P.R.) that do not want P.R. to have statehood.

That could actually end up as a bonus for the LDS church if we didn't have to buy materials from the BSA. Think about how much these badges and things cost currently...and how much they probably could cost if we made and sold them via distribution services instead. If we had to manufacture the materials for our BSA programs, I think we'd save a LOT of money that we use in purchasing stuff...I'd call that a win/win. Call them LDS Eagles rather than Classic Eagles and I think both us and the BSA might consider that a win (afterall, there's already the term non-lds use in some instances for those Eagles in LDS troops, calling them the Mormon Eagles and other such things...this would just make a more stark difference and officialize the differences between LDS troops and the ones that follow the BSA into chaotic policy heck).