is being overweight a sin?

[Guest MormonGator]

15 minutes ago, LeSellers said:

There are times when it feels as if everything is personal and that everything is an argument.

 

Perhaps we should all ask ourselves "Am I adding to that environment? Am I making it seem like everything is personal or an argument?" If I ever did that, I apologize. Not my intention at all.  

Or, on the flip side "Am I being overly defensive? Am I taking things too personally?" I admit I'm guilty of that too. 

Edited March 11, 2016 by MormonGator

[estradling75]

11 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

Perhaps; but I daresay it's quite a trick to boil water in an earthenware vessel over an open flame.

I admit it would not be without challenges....  But then the whole of the Law of Moses posed challenges to various aspects of life

 

 

[unixknight]

9 minutes ago, LeSellers said:

There are times when it feels as if everything is personal and that everything is an argument.

It makes me feel better. Nothing more.

Lehi

I find, when that happens to me, it's a good time to take a couple of days off from forum posting.  I used to be so grumpy sometimes that I'd start to take it out on my family and that's when I realized what it was.  It also helps to think of that Brigham Young quote that used to be my sig:

"He who takes offense when no offense is intended is a fool, and he who takes offense when offense is intended is a greater fool."
—Brigham Young

Not calling you (or anyone here) a fool, of course.  Just a good quote to keep in mind.

[LeSellers]

14 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

Look, it's just a question. That it. I've seen some do it in forums, some don't. Stop being so defensive. It's not personal, we are all friends here. Not everything is an argument. 

I didn't notice she did. Like I said, it wasn't an insult. Don't take it personal. 

If it makes you feel better, I'll ask her too. 

There are times when it feels as if everything is personal and that everything is an argument.

It makes me feel better. Nothing more.

Lehi

[LeSellers]

16 minutes ago, unixknight said:

"He who takes offense when no offense is intended is a fool, and he who takes offense when offense is intended is a greater fool."
—Brigham Young

I've quoted Brother Brigham a hundred fifty-seven times.

I was not offended, merely annoyed.

Lehi

[zil]

1 hour ago, MormonGator said:

Off topic-Why do you state your name after every post? We know it's you. Not an insult, just asking. 

Probably because for those who grew up pre-internet-forums, it was considered normal, polite, expected, and other such things, to sign what you wrote.  In business communication, even email, it still is.  I _frequently_ delete my real name from the end of my posts because it's so ingrained in me to sign what I write, and it's _always_ a conscious effort to not sign what I write.

Frankly, I wish more people would sign their online communication so you don't have to write things like: "Dear estradling75" (which requires you to scroll up and make sure you didn't screw it up because that's not a normal way to address someone, not a word, not an obvious nickname, it's just a string of letters and numbers with no meaning to anyone but its owner).  (No offense intended estradling75, your login name just makes for a good example.)

[unixknight]

19 minutes ago, zil said:

Probably because for those who grew up pre-internet-forums, it was considered normal, polite, expected, and other such things, to sign what you wrote.  In business communication, even email, it still is.  I _frequently_ delete my real name from the end of my posts because it's so ingrained in me to sign what I write, and it's _always_ a conscious effort to not sign what I write.

Frankly, I wish more people would sign their online communication so you don't have to write things like: "Dear estradling75" (which requires you to scroll up and make sure you didn't screw it up because that's not a normal way to address someone, not a word, not an obvious nickname, it's just a string of letters and numbers with no meaning to anyone but its owner).  (No offense intended estradling75, your login name just makes for a good example.)

I think the reason people don't do that is for many of us, forum posts feel more like a verbal conversation than a chain of correspondence.  Since we don't sign off on our sentences when we chat, the same feel applies here.

[zil]

10 minutes ago, unixknight said:

I think the reason people don't do that is for many of us, forum posts feel more like a verbal conversation than a chain of correspondence.  Since we don't sign off on our sentences when we chat, the same feel applies here.

That's only valid because the forum puts your login name and chosen avatar on every post.  If the forum didn't do that, _and_ no one signed a name, it wouldn't feel like a conversation (verbal or otherwise); it would feel like being in the midst of a bunch of screaming strangers.

[unixknight]

9 minutes ago, zil said:

That's only valid because the forum puts your login name and chosen avatar on every post.  If the forum didn't do that, _and_ no one signed a name, it wouldn't feel like a conversation (verbal or otherwise); it would feel like being in the midst of a bunch of screaming strangers.

I really like the way you phrased that last part.

[Guest MormonGator]

8 hours ago, unixknight said:

I think the reason people don't do that is for many of us, forum posts feel more like a verbal conversation than a chain of correspondence.  Since we don't sign off on our sentences when we chat, the same feel applies here.

That's exactly how I feel, so I find that formality a little strange. Just to be clear-there is nothing wrong with that, everything is fine, that isn't a personal attack- knock yourself out do what you wish. Just not my thing. 

[Maureen]

Quote

Carb quoted:

Are you so ignorant as to believe it is actually "alcohol" that provides ALL or even most of the health benefits you allude to and not a completely different constituent within the beverage (which, BTW, is not contained in most alcoholic beverages)?  Alcohol itself, I understand is not cut and dry (no pun intended).  But you're not even admitting it's mostly something else.
Are you so arrogant that you honestly believe that most Mormons are ignorant of the health findings of the past 20 years?  
Are you so close-minded that you believe Mormons will say anything and everything to justify complete temperance?
Are you so hypocritical that you are oblivious to how you committed the very error that this statement implies of Mormons?

 

I apologize that I overlooked your adjective explanations here but I'm still confused by these adjectives based on my quote below:

Quote

You'd be surprised by the health benefits alcohol can provided.

I made this comment because unixknight said:

Quote

Some people handle alcohol just fine, some don't, but since there are very few (if any) real, measurable benefits to consuming alcohol, they don't outweigh the negatives so it's better to have everyone just avoid it.

My whole quote was:

Quote

You'd be surprised by the health benefits alcohol can provided. But that's an argument for a different thread. 

When I wrote it I was replying to unixknight and only unixknight.

M.

[Maureen]

14 hours ago, MormonGator said:

Maureen why do you put "M" on your signature? Not an insult, just curious. 

Hey Gator, I put an "M" at the end of my posts to make them feel complete. Thanks for asking.

M.

[Vort]

The term "alcohol" has at least two distinct, though related, meanings:

1. Alcohol refers to ethanol, also called ethyl alcohol, with the chemical structure CH₃-CH₂-OH. This is a substance present in small quantities in many foods, especially liquids with a high sugar content such as fruit juices. Such trace amounts are common in many foods, such as breads, and our liver metabolizes trace amounts of alcohol with no apparent ill effect. Larger but still modest amounts of alcohol result in a poisoned condition characterized by impairment of higher functions and rational abilities, ranging from almost unnoticeable effects to profound impairment, even unconsciousness. This condition is commonly known as drunkenness, and has been a scourge to humanity throughout history. Even larger amounts of alcohol (though still relatively small, on the order of half a liter for a large adult, much less for smaller people) are lethal.
2. Alcohol refers to any beverage that contains more than trace amounts of ethanol. Thus, wines and beers, though typically with a fairly low alcohol content (on the order of a couple of percent), are classified as alcoholic drinks.

The advent of distilled liquors has somewhat blurred this distinction. Is 190-proof whiskey or vodka really a beverage, or is it basically slightly adulterated ethanol?

In this and other threads, I have seen very sloppy usage of the term "alcohol" and the blurring of the above meanings. When Party A says, "Alcohol(1) is a poison," and Party B replies, "Oh, you would be surprised at the wonderful health benefits of moderate (meaning very small) consumption of alcohol(2)," that is a verbal sleight of hand, a Trojan horse designed to distract from the facts about ethanol and replace it with a discussion about historically consumed fermented beverages.

EDIT: To be fair, it works the other way, too, such as when Party A says, "Drinking small amounts of alcohol(2) is not necessarily deleterious," and Party B responds, "Don't you know that alcohol(1) is a deadly poison?"

Edited March 12, 2016 by Vort