WANDERER

When I visited Kentucky I went to a restaurant where this young female waitress attempted to take my order. She spoke english, some sort of U.S regional accent, but I couldn't identify any words that she spoke: let alone vowel sounds and consonants. I was pretty floored by the experience and it gave me a lot of respect for the diversity that people cope with seamlessly and that makes up the U.S. My mum had an open door policy to Morman mishys and always chatted with them. My sister and I would try to divert one into talking with us cause they had such neat accents ; ) . Mostly about basketball and family, if we could get them to talk to us, and I'm sure it was mostly to be helpful and to allow Mum to chat without 'the kids interrupting' or being distracted about what we were up to and because we were annoyingly persistent. They were soft spoken. And tolerant of bratty kids : P

I think it's worthwhile to see the individual people instead and to be wary of depersonalisation. Some other things about Flora: although I think there's a lot of misinformation out there: her rape case was dismissed by the courts when she was 13 her father was convicted in 1983 of sexual assault and sentenced to five years in prison when she was 15 (she left at 16) My guess is that the guardianship was approved when legal procedures started and other evidence was given by others as her own evidence was not enough. her sister of fourteen was married she was one of 28 children in her family Some questions about her grandmother's story: Flora had money for drinking etc....well that's rather sad...it doesn't take too much to realise links there...taking advantage of and being taken advantage of. Things in her life sound a bit messy. Here is a quote Jessop was not prepared for life on the outside - "naive to the point of being socially retarded," as she puts it. She also was tormented that she might have damned herself to hell by fleeing the church. Her untidy life during that period speaks to the difficulty of adjusting to the outside world. And she persists because "every time we can save a child, it's saving a little piece of me too, repairing a little bit of the damage." I feel rather sorry for Flora and all that she went through. Does her lifestyle discredit her? Does it make her any less of a victim of abuse? Has she and does she continue to make mistakes? Where exactly are the lines protecting freedom to be drawn? Where will Flora draw them? Where do other people draw them? Are they the right lines? Who are the easiest targets? Is Flora branded because of her moral choices, and more so, because she was FLDS and she is taking on morality issues? Will her battle for victims of abuse lead to the right outcomes and be carried out justly and fairly? Is it a battle against individuals who do wrong or an organisation? All very sad.

People

How is Flora doing now Kosher?

Who knows what I would relinquish under certain situations: aka date rape drugs, torture and other such things. I'm well aware that people with a great deal of integrity and honour have said anything they had to in order to make the pain stop, their participation end or be allowed to die. On some occasions you don't get to walk away a winner. On most occasions, you don't get to die your way out of situations where other people dishonour you. I think we should be very clear about this: ANY dishonour is all theirs.

Yes, Tom, for sacrificial love I think it is.

Thankyou for your comments on issues of free agency and religious morality. I think I'm far more likely to look at the fruits and make a personal decision on whether the results are immoral or not. It's an accountability thing. Finian: if you're going to munch on locusts, it's a good idea to remove the wings and legs so they don't get stuck in your teeth ; ) .

We can't control whether that person is going to act lovingly towards us or be worthy of that love. The problem there is not really loving the person, but how we deal with fear. And there are things to be fearful of in many situations where we find it difficult to love someone. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.

Finian, can I clarify, The concept is morality and what God has made reference to that indicates His support. And that morality cannot be used to attack the things that God has referenced support to. You support it by not attacking it on moral grounds as you find this indicative of placing our standards above God. Other people reference this support differently. Some people literally do not wear plaits in their hair. I came from a fundamentalist church where wearing your hair in plaits was not considered okay. Some people have used the Bible to justify racism. God's support has been interpreted diversely throughout time. You interpret the stance on clothing as led by spiritual understanding of what morality is and also in regards to polygamy and under-age marriage. According to your understanding of scriptural times you explain that God supports 14 year old marriages and that they cannot be considered immoral: or violating accepted principles of what is right and wrong as determined by God. I'm interested in your explanation of your spiritual understanding of this. Are we all immoral according to your understanding for not supporting the things that you reference God as supporting? And do we place our standards above Gods when we do not practice this? Adding: Kosher I would also like to hear your thoughts on this.

For whatever reason, sometimes I may not bring out the best in a person. I know, hard to believe isn't it LOL. It's often interesting seeing them in a group of people and how different they are, or talking to their friends and getting their perspective or socialising in a different setting. That sounds like a very humanistic approach...but you know, God gets to see all that...I'm operating on a finite perspective and God is infinite. I've resigned one person to L-Space LOL:they warp space and time around them (I'm a Pratchett fan). To me they are just too obscure to understand or comprehend why they do and say the things they do. I could hate them for the incomprehension they have of the real pain they cause others. But I don't. I'm quite fond of their quirkiness... it's definitely taken a while to appreciate them. I'm just not capable of expending a whole lot of energy on negative feelings...fairly phlegmatic on the whole. It doesn't do me any good at all to harbour that...and they wouldn't comprehend it anyway. I smile. Think of L-space and God's infinite understanding; perhaps I'll understand one day. If anything, it reveals more my problems than that persons. Love and grow...hate and dessicate...I think you can choose to be blessed by letting go of negative feelings that just aren't productive to anyone. I am cautious with them...but the care is about the way I react and interact with them.

Outside of sexual sin would that still hold true for other sins: i.e. to be asked to assist in theft...bundling up the cash. To be asked to lie: everything is okay on the phone to the police after an alarm has sounded. Or is it specific?

So is it really acceptable to tell your kids to kill themselves? If they're going to interpret it 'exactly', will they do exactly what they're told should they fail to live up to and honour parental expectations. Or do you mean that should it come to a choice of having their life threatened for what they believe in and value, then they should stand true to their faith? I'm confused about what exactly the message is that children are being given.

I have said that if GOD condones something then it is at least moral. You can disagree with something in the scriptures but I find it difficult to say that it is a good idea for a believer to put themselves as morally superior to God. I don't think that's quite what people believe. Jesus lived a very different lifestyle to what most Christians live today...is it required for us to follow Jewish customs as he did? Do girls have to get married at 14 after Mary's example? That was then and this is now. We respect the values: honouring your parents, obedience to God and so on. But we are not literally living the way our Saviour did. We could carry it quite far: only eating the same foods of the historical era, using the same language etc. The difference is between what we perceive as customs and important beliefs and the approach that we have to sacred texts perhaps. Mary at 14 is not a religious moral issue...it's not even an issue as historically it was part of our cultural practices. Do we consider it immoral historically. No, just a different time and age. We are blessed with medical advancements and long lives and health. Our children are blessed with longer childhoods. We value their safety and protect them in the best ways that we know how. It is interesting the number of sites that point out Mary's age...as if it were some immorality on our behalf that we did not do exactly as our scriptures dictated. Our scriptures also mention not wearing your hair in plaits many times. Yet to consider someone damned for doing so isn't my belief...or perhaps yours either. KJV also mentions dragons...but does that mean there were real dragons? These may present as seeming inconsistencies to those of other faiths. What do I think about cultural practices and underage marriage...is it about tolerance...nope...young girls and their families are the one's who tolerate it. There's a lot we can do to make their lives safer medically and so on, if we can, and where it should be done and with care. Is it intolerant of me not to practice the same customs or have the same beliefs or even the same way of following scriptures. No. Is it intolerant of me to accept the child protection laws and defend them. That is my agency. And if people are practicing certain things against the cultural and legal laws of a nation that is also about their agency. If I believe that my beliefs are worth going against the laws and culture then doing so has repercussions that I will have to face, as with any group that finds their beliefs and practices put them in this position. I'm speaking in generalised terms and not against any particular group of people. And yes, culturally, I do believe that people protect the children and care for them, and may not have the same beliefs that I do. There are some fundamental shared values: health and valuing young lives and I believe that the work done there is important in terms of medical aid and social aid to those that become outcasts and need assistance..while honouring the laws and rules and beliefs of the people involved. That goes both ways. It does not mean we have to change our laws and beliefs in order to be considered tolerant or more devout or vice versa. However, in this day and age it does seem that we give more and more concessions about morality in order to be more 'politically correct' and 'religiously correct.' But to whose standards?

Very funny. Haven't seen this list: I'll have to forward it on.

For something that was said to him in 1922 to reoccur in his conversation he must have given it a lot of thought as he mentions it again in 1979 in the above quote. I am thinking that it was on his mind a bit. Perhaps at different stages of his life he understood what his dad said in different ways, according to where he was at.

It went on. There were different responses: we don't tell; it's none of our business; what else can you expect of people like that; they're all as bad as each other; they asked for it; we can't believe that ugly lie; mental instability; race etc. To talk about it, tarnished you. Is there more now than there was then...? I wouldn't know. On the media: Once apon a time we used to be able to cut pictures out of magazines and use them in art. This is impossible to do nowadays. Even the commercials during what is seen as children's viewing hours is inappropriate. And is it really necessary to put thinly disguised adult concepts into children's movies to entertain supervising adults? And it's all about money vs morality. It takes a lot of people to complain nowadays when it is versus a $ sign.

Kosher I disagree with underage marriages. Fullstop. I teach. I work with four to thirteen year olds. I have 18 years experience within all age groups. I react in the way that I do, because child abuse is wrong and heartbreaking. However, I agree with you that everyone is entitled to a fair trial and due process. This right extends to the FLDS. I understand that I misconstrued your intentions with the word Miss.

The rest of what Romney had to say about it: I pondered that statement at the time. I did not then have the full understanding of it that my father had, but I have never forgotten it. I can think of no blessings to be more fervently desired than those promised to the pure and the virtuous. Jesus spoke of specific rewards for different virtues but reserved the greatest, so it seems to me, for the pure in heart, "for they," said he, "shall see God" (Matthew 5:8). And not only shall they see the Lord, but they shall feel at home in his presence. Here is his promise--the Savior's promise: "Let virtue garnish thy thoughts unceasingly; then shall thy confidence wax strong in the presence of God" (D&C 121:45). (Marion G. Romney, "Trust in the Lord," Ensign, May 1979, p. 40.)

Fistulas are the result from way-too-young child brides having sex. This is just genetic, they develop later. They are just too tiny. Can you think of anything more morally abhorrent than that. I can't.

Granted it has to do with the fact that when working in preschools everyone is Miss name. . . I do not understand why you find this a problem. LOL....that was decades ago when married women were not allowed to work. You will now find more Mrs than Misses. And during those times there were more Mrs than Misses and it was quite common for children to accidently use Mr as it is quite common now for Mrs. I really don't want to get more graphic about the physical implications. Is that necessary. It is not pretty and I would rather not considering that this is a family friendly forum...it would only serve to close the post and I cannot post links.

Mode is the vehicle by which preparation is best utilised. There are plenty of cases where people have adequate preparation but not been adequately prepared.

A concept of what is heroic or valiant sometimes differs. What is honor and what is honourable? I think one should put value on your life and not sacrifice it needlessly. It does no honour to anyone, least of all God if you cannot apply forgiveness to yourself or others or accept attonement and redemption. You can find your way back. It's best not to have to do that, cause it's not an easy path. But the point is, we all have fallen short and it's rather prideful to think that we have not. The ultimate sacrifice has already been given...your life cannot do that for yourself or for anyone else. Be heroic enough to live with the consequences of your decisions. You cannot run away from sin. However, sometimes you have to step and be a hero...if you're ever in that situation...the plan should always be to save as much life as possible including your own. Treating God's gift of life lightly is a sin.

Nope. Zero NDE. I have had many LAEs: life affirming experiences.

Remotely...perhaps he is the current website administrater of an LDS writer or perhaps not...a writer who does preparedness type themes and preparedness support. Not sure if the writer is highly regarded but I assume so...whether in a Jule's vernish fictional enlightened way as a futurist analyst or as an accurate prophet inspired by God I am not sure. I do not mean to give offense, I am just not knowledgeable on the topic.

One big online commercial...with content being pushed further and further off the net by advertising and marketing and paid memberships. On the other hand I rather appreciate being able to google down an instruction video on how to do just about anything practical and the community element of shared knowledge within similar goal-minded groups is great. However there is also the aspect of massive over-duplication ...almost a 'becoming' effect on content-alike forum and blogs. It is good to interact with other sources of information rather than become totally internetted. Will light shine through the darkness of cyberspace...if anything discernment is more needed than ever.