• Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Carborendum

  1. Clarence Gilyard
  2. I was actually thinking the same thing. But my position was... "What's the point." (Notice, no question mark.)
  3. If we made the presupposition you suggest, then we must recognize mindset in which Madison made the statement. Recognizing gay marriage as a "moral ideal" would have been so far beyond the pale that he would think the morality and religion of the people were so corrupt that we were beyond hope of the Constitution pulling us back from such corruption.
  4. I need to apologize about some of my previous posts. It occurred to me that I'd only read 1984 as a freshman in high school... And, let's just say that I was a very naïve teenager. And I have a suspicion that my English teacher had never read it herself. I went and found a copy to read. Holy COW! There were so many nuances that just went right over my head when I was younger. And with my mentality of not comprehending words other than their face value... Subtext, double-meanings,etc. I was completely oblivious. It was basically a learning disability. Yes, everything you said was right. We're already there. But luckily, the internet is very difficult to fully scrub. We have information at our fingertips. And social media is doing its best to limit that information availability to the average person. I'm reminded of Biden's statement about what gas prices were under Trump. Wow! And even with the internet, people simply believe it. Worse, the MEDIA is repeating the claims. New-speak? How about NEWSpeak? Time for hating others for their hate-speech.
  5. Yeah, I thought that was awfully convenient for him to claim. But the woke crowd already destroyed any chance of denying the claim since it is all supposed to be a personal declaration and no other proof is valid. A woman is a person who identifies as a woman is a person who identifies as a woman is a...
  6. Around 12:20. Don't know if it is true. But Cruz did accuse Romney of giving "terrible legal advice" to "one senior official in the Church". The terrible legal advice was that there were indeed protections to religious organizations. And that was exactly what the statement said. I had a hard time with that portion of the statement because I read the bill. I sure didn't see anything that would protect entity from the requirements of this law. According to Mike Lee and Ted Cruz, the provisions which supposedly protect religious entities are "toothless" as the podcast describes them. So, there really are no substantive protections that will do any good in a court of law. If Romney actually did do this, he just lost all his political capital with any "senior figure" in the Church.
  7. Yeah... Miscommunication. We seem to have very different definitions for words. I use "The Samuel Principle" in a more broad application than what you seem to have defined for yourself. Yes, the clamoring for a king was the issue with Samuel. But the more generic application of the principle is A) The Lord has stated what He wants and what his position is: Usually through his prophets. B) Even after hearing that, the people decide to do something else. C) The Lord recognizes that man has his agency, and while not changing his position on what is good, better, best, right, wrong, or indifferent, He acknowledges that the path that man has chosen to take is not the one he commanded/counseled. D) It is bad enough that His Spirit will not strive with man. But it is not so bad that He's ready to bring down the fire and brimstone... yet. A modern version (and I believe Elder Renlund agrees with me) is when Joseph asked about the 116 pages for Martin Harris. He said no twice. We don't know what the exact wording was. That was apparently between Joseph and the Lord. But eventually, Joseph got this idea that the Lord approved. Not quite. Elder Renlund says: The Lord never changed his position. But He really didn't see a purpose in saying no again since at this point, A) He realized that Joseph would eventually try to rationalize it himself OR B)He knew that this was an excellent opportunity to give Joseph an object lesson in not questioning the Lord's wisdom. Of course, it wasn't a "spur of the moment" decision. He'd planned this for over 2000 years. He wasn't surprised. But Joseph learned this lesson. And he was better for it. I need to say this carefully. I'm really trying to interpret what you just wrote here. I have no idea what you're trying to say I said. I apologize if I'm just being stupid here. But I really don't understand what this is. I gave an example in the previous post above about what I was saying. What happened to Mormon? Why was his mouth shut? I was not talking about the majority of the membership of the Church. I was talking about the majority of this nation's population. I'll give another example. In 2000 Pres Hinckley gave this address where he spoke of the 7 yrs of feast & 7 yrs of famine. He warned us to store up and save up. A little while later, a Church video was shared with ward and stake preparedness specialists. Elder Packer asked for everyone involved to continue to constrain all in their wards and stakes to be prepared for hard times. But as prophets and apostles, they would no longer bring up preparedness in General Conference because (Elder Packer then quoted Pres. Hinckley) "We've been giving sermons on this for over 20 years. Now it's time for the Lord to preach His sermon." It took another 7 years for it to come to fruition. Likewise, for about 20 to 30 years, the prophets have given their sermons. It has been almost 30 years since the Proclamation was issued. Now it's time for the Lord to preach His sermon. I wonder if this statement they put forth is a similar message. "We've preached our sermons. We've tried to work with government on a civic level. Now the Lord will preach His sermon." Only this time, it isn't only telling the membership of the church what the doctrine is (they've already made that clear). It is now about telling the world what our position is. They already know. The prophets have spoken. Their garments are clean of the blood and sins of this generation. Now let them wallow in the filth they have chosen, and we'll see what happens. The Church will always be here as a beacon of hope for those who still choose the Lord. But when the wicked refuse to accept the truth, the Lord will sometimes tell the prophets to stop preaching to the gentiles... for the same reason he told Mormon to stop preaching to the Nephites. I don't. But I believe the official statement from the Church might indicate a certain expectation (hope?) that certain PTB will have a reasonable range in which to work. I don't know. I can't speak for the Lord, nor his prophets. But what I DON'T see is a change in the position that the Lord has taken on gay marriage or that we draw the line on Temple marriage for same-sex couples. Part of this disconnect is that I can clearly see when the Church is making a political move (albeit with a longer term positioning for religious rights) vs when they are doing something from a purely religious position. I know many will simply refuse to accept that ANYTHING the Church says or does in an official capacity is anything BUT 100% religious. I disagree.
  8. I see it as the Samuel Principle. The Lord has mad His position very clear with previous political actions. But we live in a republic, not a theocracy. And the people have their agency. And they've chosen to go against the will of the Lord. So, what does a prophet do? He preaches repentance. And when they stop listening... It is a sign of the times that the Lord is telling the prophets to stop preaching what they have preached before. Not contradicting what was said already. Stopping. Nope. We've always had a clear position that LGBTQ individuals have basic human rights and civil rights as outlined in the Constitution. Such a statement may have been a reminder to both those in and out of the Church that this has always been the position of the Church. In fact, Utah (with input from Church Leaders) led the path forward to legislation that clearly outlined what rights everyone ought to have regardless of sexual orientation. It was largely ignored by the public. But it was a pretty clear position. And they've just reiterated that SAME position they've had since the defeat of Prop 22. I believe part of the hoopla that this announcement generated is that people don't understand how to separate religion from politics. While it would be ideal for politics to mimic religious virtue, it just doesn't happen that way. So, we need to delineate clear lines where we say THIS religious principle NEEDS to be codified (e.g. murder, theft...). THIS one would be great if... (e.g. sanctity of traditional marriage). But in either case the voice of the people will rule in politics. Not so in religion.
  9. I just have to wonder why the left is so trigger happy about blaming this on conservative rhetoric. So far, we know exactly zero about the murderer and his motives. Yet they're already calling it a hate crime and blaming evil on conservative rhetoric. Have we learned ANYthing from Jussie Smollet and Bubba Wallace? Can we at least wait for the facts to come out before assigning blame on an ideology from people who are just as horrified by such wonton violence as the ones blaming them? If they're right, then go ahead and start the yelling. If they're wrong, and it really was just a lunatic going on a rampage who happened to pick a gay bar completely at random. And if it was random, will any of these people who jumped the gun apologize? No mea culpa? No, they'll say, "Maybe it wasn't this time. But you know it happens. So, we were right even when we're wrong."
  10. Elder Bednar addressed this very issue during a Q&A at a fireside (if I remember correctly). I'm afraid I can't find a link to it on the Church website. It is semantics. Elder Bednar defined it with Def #2 above. But we often think of Def #1 above. He did not state, but did allude to definition #1 being perfectly natural (as you describe). And it is an essential part of discovery toward real belief/faith/testimony. But when the doubt takes on the characteristics of #2 as we apply it to our belief in God (etc) it can be damaging. And with that "suspicion/distrust", I'm not seeing how faith can abide in the same mind.
  11. It is ironic that with a Republican majority in the house, we can look forward to a gun ban actually passing this next session. Or, if there is any fear from the left, they may try to ram it through before the new representatives are sworn in. My prediction? It is too close to call. They may very well be able to pass even after the new Congress. The majority is not solid enough.
  12. I have a talk on Elder Bedna r's address this last conference. Here are my notes if you care to read them.PUT ON THY STRENGTH.pdf
  13. I often give an answer to this question which causes people to get the wrong idea. The immediate assumption is that I obtain knowledge of spiritual things through experimentation as would a scientist obtain knowledge about scientific things. But the fact is that experimentation (a-la the pure scientific method) is not how anyone obtains the bulk of spiritual or scientific knowledge.
  14. Elon is in a race against time. He has to implement a new system before he runs out of money. If he can do it in time, the platform will be preserved and become a bastion of free speech. If not, he will have just wasted $55B. And other platforms will vie for who will be the new Twitter. The fastest way to the goal is: Be sure to have access to all the computer systems and security protocols. Then fire nearly everyone. Hire some wiz who can program in the language used by the previous employees -- but can also program in a completely different language. Minimize the entire company Have small business level of employees. Outsource most of their hardware needs. Change the business end of it into a sales and marketing group. If he doesn't do something that is either substantially similar to this or will substantially accomplish the same ends as this plan, he will fail. And we can say goodbye to it.
  15. The fourth and final graph is against the 70s stagflation era. And since Biden is quite reminiscent of Carter both in leadership and economic competence, it makes sense. The greatest deviation was between COVID vs the Kennedy Slide of 1962. Obviously, COVID was much deeper than the Kennedy slide. But it really is a very close match. This seems to show that we will see two more troughs before recovery can begin. At this scale, we'll hit rock bottom around mid 2026. However, the recovery from the great recession began about 5 or 6 months after Reagan took office. If the recovery back then was due to Reagan era policies, then it is entirely possible that with an economics/finance/business savvy president (and team) inaugurated in '25, we could see a recovery by fall of that same year. So, it is a question of the DOW hitting 24,000 vs 20,000. But let's face it, we're not going to see a recovery during the current administration. And if he gets re-elected, or someone with similar tax and spend and anti-economics policies gets in office, it could extend for years more. As they're going now, another four years could mean a global economic meltdown.
  16. The third graph is against the great recession (Orange). The purple scale seems to indicate a recovery. But the Bush era recovery from the .com bubble is not as high as the Trump era of prosperity. The blue scale lines up rather nicely all around. Unfortunately, at this scale, it becomes self-referential. It doesn't help at all. The cyan is the least favorable result. It indicates that we will have to go down below 17,000 (DOW) before we recover. I sure hope that's not what it will take. But the graphs does line up rather nicely.
  17. This second image is against the prosperity graph from Reagan to the present. As you can see the .com bubble and Enron (green) coincide with COVID (purple). This graph also seems to indicate that we are in recovery. The Dow crash of '08 also coincides with his year's crash. If this were the only thing available, it could be a reason to think we're in recovery. But you can see it doesn't match well.
  18. So, I finally got down to brass tax and got a much more detailed look at the DOW vs past patterns. Very interesting how these are similar but different. This first image is our latest movements vs the Depression. The Red is the depression era graph. The purple and cyan is our era at different scales. Purple shows us going down for a bit longer before recovering. They cyan shows that we're in recovery already. But neither of these is a good match. Post 4 of 4 below shows the best match. But I wanted to show you how these patterns lined up (or rather DIDN'T line up) with other notable times in history.
  19. I don't see what position they've changed.
  20. I don't believe it is compromise. We are not yet at full strength. We are still gathering. And those that have gathered, not all are faithful. Who among us has experienced the power of godliness sufficient to sustain us in the last day? How many instead would shrink in horror at the armies of Gog gathering around us? The reason we don't stand tall is that we do not have large enough numbers with strong reeds and deep roots to withstand the wind. And we know that the hurricane cannot last. It is but a moment. We have to be brought low before we can learn to depend on the Lord.
  21. I believe that the only way for Zion to become reality is for people to long for it so desperately that we'll do anything for it. And as human nature goes, the only way for us to long for it to that degree is for us to be in such dire straits and under the thumb of such widespread evil and tyranny such that we cannot have any hope in man, but in God alone.
  22. Whelp! With all the hullaballoo about FTX, I had to get out of crypto. Luckily, I made some money off it before everything fell apart. I have no idea where it's all going now. Some crypto is going up, some down. It's a mad scramble for now. I'll take a look again when things settle down. In the meantime, it looks like that semiconductor bill is finally beginning to kick in. But I don't see it as a long term boost. It's still uncertain.
  23. This case was finally settled recently. The only "crime" that was committed (by the private citizen) was that Holly left her children in a LOCKED car for less than 10 minutes on a COOL morning while she went into a shop for some muffins. Although the officer called to the scene (apparently a busy body called on her) admitted that no crime was committed, he was forced to call CPS. If no crime was committed, why was he forced to call them? Holly received a knock at the door from a strange woman (CPS) who did not provide ID or credentials. Holly refused to let her in. The woman returned with a Sheriff's deputy with no warrant. Holly refused to let them in. They threatened to take all the kids away from her unless she showed them the children. She finally relented. Then WITHOUT PROBABLE CAUSE OR ANY LEGAL PURPOSE the children (both male and female) were forced to undergo a strip search in front of the female CPS agent and the male deputy. The Sheriff's office settled out of court for about $500k. That is a travesty. This should have been in the millions. And that CPS agent should have been fired. But nothing happened to her as far as we know. This happened in a rural area of Kentucky. So, don't think that because you live in a red state, this can't happen to you.