cdowis

I enjoy most genres except current country music. The old stuff is great, Johnny Cash, Randy Travis, etc. as someone here has already said. 
 
The three artists that are currently in my iTunes library that produce consistently clean but also high-quality music, and who are not already quite well-known (I think) are Loreena McKennitt, First Aid Kit, and Drew Holcomb and the Neighbors. 
 
This is one of my favorites from Loreena McKennitt:
 
https://youtu.be/JsNJuhBfbPg
 
Disclaimer: the video is kind of strange. All her videos are, she's a slightly odd woman but she has heaps of talent. Also check out her songs The Highwayman, The Mummer's Dance, and the Lady of Shallot. And her christmas album is quite wonderful too. 

Please do not hijack this thread and turn it into a partisan debate.  Please do not use the "republican" or "democratic" parties in your response.
 
You can start your OWN thread.
thankyousoverymuch.

Thanks for sharing with us your personal opinion on what constitutes canonized scripture and official doctrine.  
 
Perhaps this statement from the church will clarify this issue.
 
http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/approaching-mormon-doctrine

This just blows me away.
 
https://youtu.be/8OelvnFLC7U
 
Be sure to listen to this with someone else.

The story is that the famous Irish poet Thomas Moore, returning from war, found his wife Bessy locked away in her room, unwilling to see him. Bessy was an actress by trade, and had contracted smallpox. Though she had survived, her face was scarred, and she was humiliated and believed herself unlovable. Moore is supposed to have written her a poem and sung it to her through the closed door, using a well-known Irish melody.
 
Believe me, if all those endearing young charms
That I gaze on so fondly today
Were to change by tomorrow, and fleet in my arms,
Like fairy-gifts, fading away,
Thou wouldst still be ador'd as this moment thou art,
Let thy loveliness fade as it will,
And around the dear ruin, each wish of my heart
Would entwine itself verdantly still.
 
It is not while beauty and youth are thine own
And thy cheeks unprofan'd by a tear
That the fervor and faith of a soul can be known
To which time will but make thee more dear.
Oh, the heart that has truly lov'd never forgets,
But as truly loves on to the close
As the sunflower turns to her god when he sets
The same look which she turn'd when he rose.
 
However true this story may or may not be, I choose to believe it because I think it's beautiful. (Though it furthers another pet peeve of mine, which is that a woman's worth is judged largely on how pretty she is -- but that is another matter.) Here is a performance worth hearing.
 

 
Here is a pretty violin version (no lyrics) by Jenny Oaks Baker, who is pretty well-known in Mormon circles.
 

 
Many of you, like me, will know this tune by its use in the famous Loonie Tunes "xylophone gag", as shown here.
 

Isaiah 2: 3 ...he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.
 
There will be two locations -- Zion (the New Jerusalem) for the gathering of the Ten Tribes and Jerusalem for the gathering of the Jews.
 
The physical gathering of Israel means that the covenant people will be “gathered home to the lands of their inheritance, and shall be established in all their lands of promise” (2 Nephi 9:2). The tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh will be gathered in the Americas. The tribe of Judah will return to the city of Jerusalem and the area surrounding it. The ten lost tribes will receive from the tribe of Ephraim their promised blessings (see D&C 133:26–34).
https://www.lds.org/manual/gospel-principles/chapter-42-the-gathering-of-the-house-of-israel?lang=eng

Isaiah 2: 3 ...he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.
 
There will be two locations -- Zion (the New Jerusalem) for the gathering of the Ten Tribes and Jerusalem for the gathering of the Jews.
 
The physical gathering of Israel means that the covenant people will be “gathered home to the lands of their inheritance, and shall be established in all their lands of promise” (2 Nephi 9:2). The tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh will be gathered in the Americas. The tribe of Judah will return to the city of Jerusalem and the area surrounding it. The ten lost tribes will receive from the tribe of Ephraim their promised blessings (see D&C 133:26–34).
https://www.lds.org/manual/gospel-principles/chapter-42-the-gathering-of-the-house-of-israel?lang=eng

Don't call an ambulance from "The Better Late than Never Ambulance Service".
 
(source -- The Non Sequitor Calendar)

Speaking of the translation stone, this prompted a memory that you may find interesting.
 
About twenty years ago I attending a fireside by someone who has extensive knowledge and experience among the Amerindians, especially as it relates to the church.
 
He cited an account by the early English settlers in the New England area.  As some of them were scouting the area, and locating various tribal villages, they came across a remarkable sight.  At night, of course it is very dark, and each village keeps a fire fire going in the middle of the village. 
 
These  English scouts came across something they had never seen before -- in the middle of the village was a shining stone which lighted up the village.  The following day they went back and tried to barter to get possess this stone, but they adamantly refused all offers.
 
A few days later they came back for another try but the wife of the chief had thrown the stone into river, beyond any hope of recovery.  They asked her why she did this, and she said that her people could not trust the settlers, and eventually they would take it away by force.  So she put it where no one could get it.
 
The speaker gave the reference, but I don't have it anymore.

My MIL has NPD (Narcissistic Personality Disorder) and tells anyone who will listen that one of her biggest accomplishments is having taken down so many of her superiors in their careers. 
 
Other than completely avoiding them, which is the best advice but of course not usually possible to follow completely.. the other best thing to do is avoid giving them information. Whether the information is about you or others, just try to communicate the minimum that is required for workplace interaction. This includes even the most basic conversational stuff, like what you had for lunch and what your plans are for the weekend. Information is where they draw their power from, they will hate you and try to manipulate it out of you in increasingly shocking ways, but stand your ground. 

From what I have observed..
 
Speak in various wards.
Handle Stake Business (Releasing, sustaining, setting apart)
Have an "assignment" over a certain aspect of the Stake.
Sit in the High Council overseeing the Stake.
Be apart of Disciplinary councils held on the stake level.
Perform other duties as asked by the Stake.
 
My inexperienced guess would be to image a Ward Council but working at the Stake Level

"There are a hundred reasons to leave the church, and only one reason to stay."

The issue has gone well beyond simple polygamy to polyamory, or group marriage.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Professor Elizabeth Brake of Arizona State University thinks that justice requires using legal recognition to “denormalize heterosexual monogamy as a way of life” and “rectif[y] past discrimination against homosexuals, bisexuals, polygamists, and care networks.”
She supports “minimal marriage,” in which “individuals can have legal marital relationships with more than one person, reciprocally or asymmetrically, themselves determining the sex and number of parties, the type of relationship involved, and which rights and responsibilities to exchange with each.”
 
......
Justice Samuel Alito voiced concerns about the norm of monogamy during oral arguments in the Obergefell case.
If “equality” requires redefining marriage to include same-sex couples, what else does “equality” require? If the fundamental right to marry is simply about consenting adult romance and caregiving, what limits could the state ever place on it?
Justice Alito posed the hypothetical of “a group consisting of two men and two women apply[ing] for a marriage license” and asked, “Would there be any ground for denying them a license?” Pursuing this line of thought further, he asked about other types of couples. How about siblings?
http://dailysignal.com/2015/07/24/how-the-media-is-promoting-polyamory-the-new-marriage-equality/?utm_source=heritagefoundation&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=morningbell&mkt_tok=3RkMMJWWfF9wsRohu63LZKXonjHpfsX66%2BgqWK6ylMI%2F0ER3fOvrPUfGjI4ATMNiMK%2BTFAwTG5toziV8R7jHKM1t0sEQWBHm

"There are a hundred reasons to leave the church, and only one reason to stay."

Are you familiar with the concept of "artistic license"?  Allow me a few examples ==>>
 
-- A painting of Christ and the apostles, each one with a halo.
---The manger scene with the baby Jesus, his parents, the shepherds, AND the three wise men.  That stable was pretty crowded
--Angels depicted with wings in the scriptures and paintings. The angel Moroni blowing a trumpet
 
Give it some thought, my friend, why these artistic depictions are not "real" or factual.
 
 
 May  I suggest this word implies that you are making a serious accusation.

Are you familiar with the concept of "artistic license"?  Allow me a few examples ==>>
 
-- A painting of Christ and the apostles, each one with a halo.
---The manger scene with the baby Jesus, his parents, the shepherds, AND the three wise men.  That stable was pretty crowded
--Angels depicted with wings in the scriptures and paintings. The angel Moroni blowing a trumpet
 
Give it some thought, my friend, why these artistic depictions are not "real" or factual.
 
 
 May  I suggest this word implies that you are making a serious accusation.

Are you familiar with the concept of "artistic license"?  Allow me a few examples ==>>
 
-- A painting of Christ and the apostles, each one with a halo.
---The manger scene with the baby Jesus, his parents, the shepherds, AND the three wise men.  That stable was pretty crowded
--Angels depicted with wings in the scriptures and paintings. The angel Moroni blowing a trumpet
 
Give it some thought, my friend, why these artistic depictions are not "real" or factual.
 
 
 May  I suggest this word implies that you are making a serious accusation.

I'm not.  Nice straw man, though. 
 
 
Maybe because Joseph Smith himself tended to emphasize the Urim and Thummim, and the distinction between that term's application to the Nephite interpreters versus the Chase stone was not clearly understood? 
 
Maybe because the seer stone's role in the translation process vis a vis the Nephite interpreters is still debated by historians?
 
Maybe because the primary accounts of the seer stone's role came from people who disaffiliated themselves from the Utah church, leading the Utah authorities to question their reliability and choose to stick with Joseph's own statements about the matter?  
 
Maybe because it was the seer stone, not the hat, that was the means of translation; and it's kind of hard to show that or emphasize the sacred nature of the seer stone by drawing a picture where it (the stone) isn't even visible?
 
Or, we can just go back to our "the Church lied to me!!!!" pity party, which I suspect is where a lot of people are more comfortable anyways.  There is, I concede, a surprising amount of (perceived) power in having been somehow victimized. 
 
 
Then maybe Omegaseamaster should measure his criticisms about how that story keeps popping up in Church manuals when Joseph Smith, Oliver Cowdery, Lucy Smith, and Emma Smith all affirmed that they were indeed used.
 
 
I'm inclined to agree with you; but we don't know that for certain.  Pretending that we know stuff we don't really know, tends to get us into an awful lot of trouble.
 
 
The code name issue rather proves my point.  The fact that such names existed was noted in the headers for two different sections of the D&C, published from 1981 through 2013.  And yet, this fact was still a surprise to at least two participants to this discussion, and one participant initially openly mocked the idea that such names existed.
 
C'mon, guys.  The Church puts things like this in its scriptures--but then the members won't read them.  So the Church puts it in the Ensign--but members complain that the Ensign is too schmaltzy/saccharine, and blow it off.  The Church puts it in its written histories--but the members complain that the histories are doctored and decline to engage with them. 
 
But then, here comes the progressive wing, saying "Yeah, for the last thirty years we've been moaning about how crappy the Sunday School and CES curricula are.  But--honest!--if you'd just talk about chastity and obedience and tithing and scriptures less, and talk about arcane details of Church history more--that would, like, totally increase our testimonies.  We swear!"
 
I call bull.  We give 'em the seer stone, they'll talk about Fanny Alger.  We give 'em Fanny Alger, they'll want to talk about the Kirtland Safety Society.  We give 'em the Kirtland Safety Society, they'll be on to Mountain Meadows.  We give 'em Mountain Meadows, they'll be on to the Book of Abraham.  We give 'em the Book of Abraham, and--hey, you know what we haven't talked much about lately?  The seer stone, and the Salt Lake's failure to engage on the topic of late is a massive threat to the testimonies of the good members of the Church!
 
It's theo-historical whack-a-mole, easily 75% of which is merely concern-trolling from latter-day libertines who wish the Church would talk about something--anything!--other than what it has chosen to emphasize over the past few decades.

"I need revelation to support the prophet"
 
Here is an experience related to me of someone who was having problems with Brigham Young.  The Lord gave him a revelation and told him, "I [the Lord] don't always agree with what he does, but he is the prophet."

I understand your frustration.  But I am sure that you would agree with me ==>>  there is no more important calling in the church than the Primary.
 
For me the issue is not that I love the kids, but I have the opportunity to teach them gospel principles, ON THEIR LEVEL, which are often missing in their homes.  My six year old grandson has a mother who is an unbeliever, but on a few occasions I have been able to take him to the Primary.  In those few visits he has gained a testimony of Jesus Christ and learned how to pray.  
One day he told me, "My mommy doesn't believe in Christ. But I do."
 
I was a substitute teacher for a class, and the lesson was on some event in church history.  But I took a few minutes to talk with the kids, and discovered some of them did not even know about the First Vision.  So we spent our time talking about Joseph Smith as  a prophet.

My final words -->>
 
Darlin', I've been meaning to tell you....gasp... cough......................  cough...  
Oh, nevermind.  It will wait............

We have a very active program in getting members to get their Tech license and to buy an HT.  There has been already a communication radio shack in the regional bishop's store house, but now they are putting one in our church building.
 
We have our own repeater, which, of course, is used by both members and nonmembers.
 
In a couple of weeks they are holding a hamcram session in the morning  to prepare to get the license, and then giving the exam in the evening.  A few weeks later they will hold training in emergency communication procedures.

I know a good member of the church who just couldn't hold down a job, and had been fired several times because of emotional and social issues.
 
The Lord Himself said that He gave us weaknesses.  We need to do the best we can, and stay true to the gospel.
 
Anyway, I got really annoyed at all the stake conferences where the stake presidency and other speakers talked about their own faith, and how well things were going for them and their families -- all their children went on a mission, married in the temple, and are bishops or stake presidents.  
 
Finally I spoke to one of the SP counselors about it, and I guess it got through.  I noted a real change in the talks, basically telling us that we all have issues and struggles.  And things don't always turn out ok for us.
 
We just keep moving on with our lives, and living the gospel as best as we can.

We have a very active program in getting members to get their Tech license and to buy an HT.  There has been already a communication radio shack in the regional bishop's store house, but now they are putting one in our church building.
 
We have our own repeater, which, of course, is used by both members and nonmembers.
 
In a couple of weeks they are holding a hamcram session in the morning  to prepare to get the license, and then giving the exam in the evening.  A few weeks later they will hold training in emergency communication procedures.

I know a good member of the church who just couldn't hold down a job, and had been fired several times because of emotional and social issues.
 
The Lord Himself said that He gave us weaknesses.  We need to do the best we can, and stay true to the gospel.
 
Anyway, I got really annoyed at all the stake conferences where the stake presidency and other speakers talked about their own faith, and how well things were going for them and their families -- all their children went on a mission, married in the temple, and are bishops or stake presidents.  
 
Finally I spoke to one of the SP counselors about it, and I guess it got through.  I noted a real change in the talks, basically telling us that we all have issues and struggles.  And things don't always turn out ok for us.
 
We just keep moving on with our lives, and living the gospel as best as we can.