Time To Make A Difference

[Traveler]

I am making thin post in honor of Prison Chaplin and his efforts to reconcile differences between LDS and Evangelicals. I admit that I carry a prejudice against most Evangelicals and have done so for years. I thought my prejudice to be a cleaver thing and now I would make public that my mind has changed – PC’s attitude and efforts are superior to my own.

I have been slow on the up take in the attitude of reconciliation. I have thought that reconciliation meant that we solve our differences rather than consider the overwhelming similarities. I have desperately attempted in vain to prevent any reconciliation by bringing to the immediate forefront any difference I could find in our doctrines. Yet, I am adamant that intention and attitude express in divine love and compassion is a greater indication of a Christian than is doctrine. Oops.

No one has to tell me the differences – I know what that is and I have an excellent handle on that. The purpose of this thread and post is to search out and agree on things LDS and Evangelicals can work together on.

Since I really do not know that much about Evangelicals I will begin with a list of things from my LDS point of view that I believe could be expanded to Evangelicals for a team effort.

1. I believe the LDS welfare program could be combined and teamed with humanitarian efforts of Evangelicals. I believe our combined efforts to relieve the poor, the sick, the oppressed and the down trodden is an area that should be considered.

2. I believe the LDS and Evangelicals can work together to improve education. I think it could be possible to expand our youth programs to have exchanges and perhaps even competitions. Can you imagine “Church ball” including games with Evangelicals? I would love to combine efforts we have for seminary to put pressure on schools to broaden education to include religious elective religion classes for high school students that gives high school credits.

3. Family values and political influence. This is one area we should work together. I would like to define political values that can be supported by both LDS and Evangelicals. Some political issues I believe we have in common:

Marriage: The support of marriage (a man and a woman) as a foundation of family to be honored and protected by law and society.

Abortion: End late term abortions of choice. Once a child reaches a viable stage abortion can only be for prescribed medical needs.

Protection of religion as a contributor to the state.

4. Community and social service and fellowship. I believe we can have exchanges and firesides where we share ideas on better living, investing, getting out of debt, food storage and other such things. I believe we could work together to clean up public parks and help clean up poor neighborhoods and areas of disasters.

I think if I lived next to PC I might even mow his lawn someday when he is away on vacation – then deny I knew anything about it. I think I agree with PC – it is time to be better neighbors.

Thanks PC

The Traveler

[StrawberryFields]

Traveler,

Your sincere post brought tears to my eyes.

Both PC and yourself are fine men in my eyes.

[a-train]

Traveler, what are you doing!?!?!? You're a hardened Mormon! Don't go all mushy!

There have been many friends and people in my life that have been secure enough in their faith to be as open and friendly as PC. I think it is a sign of TRUE faith. Only those floundering about in the seas of doubt tend to take offense when various currents attempt to carry them into obscurity with no set course or rudder. Those travelling through life with their bearings set and standing at the helm embarking in faith welcome the advice of their fellow sailors, the gleams of the shorelights, and the directions from the lighthouse.

I've always loved this story.

Respect to PC who demonstrates courtesy.

-a-train

[CrimsonKairos]

Hahahaha, I love that story, a-train. I haven't heard it in awhile.

I agree, PC rocks and I'd invite him to dinner anytime. B)

[prisonchaplain]

wow...ALMOST MISSED THIS THREAD. Thanks good people.

BTW, none other than Rev. Jerry Falwell (now "the late") incorporated LDS folks in his Moral Majority, back in the late 70s and earlier 80s. Very controversial at the time--and he took a good deal of flack for doing so.

On the educational front, I have participated in Acton Institute activities. The founder is Catholic, but he has used the institute to reach out to all religious communities with a message that faith flourishes in an environment of liberty. When I attended the three-day seminar, during my graduate studies, it turns out they had their first BYU students there as well.

Such efforts continue quietly along. And now...here at LDStalk.com...we shine another small light. Perhaps our generation will see those sparks turn into a fire?

[prisonchaplain]

1. I believe the LDS welfare program could be combined and teamed with humanitarian efforts of Evangelicals. I believe our combined efforts to relieve the poor, the sick, the oppressed and the down trodden is an area that should be considered.

Probably the key element here is for everyone to realize that those who offer a cup of water to the thirsty, food to the hungry, or clothing to the naked, are doing God's work. We need not fear that we are compromising anything to do God's work together, irregardless of our beliefs about what constitutes God's teachings.

2. I believe the LDS and Evangelicals can work together to improve education. I think it could be possible to expand our youth programs to have exchanges and perhaps even competitions. Can you imagine “Church ball” including games with Evangelicals? I would love to combine efforts we have for seminary to put pressure on schools to broaden education to include religious elective religion classes for high school students that gives high school credits.

Former Pres. Bill Clinton deserves credit for Equal Access laws. They basically clarified for public schools that if they have a chess club, then religious clubs should have the same rights. No more, no less.

Beyond that, sure, credit for off-site religious education that meets objective standards (pages read, papers written, etc.), introduction of Bible as Literature classes (it is happening sporadically). As for exchanges, it will be an interesting and heartening day when LDS and evangelical churches invite representatives to come and offer brief introductory presentations, followed by non-confrontational Q&A sessions.

3. Family values and political influence. This is one area we should work together. I would like to define political values that can be supported by both LDS and Evangelicals. Some political issues I believe we have in common:

Marriage: The support of marriage (a man and a woman) as a foundation of family to be honored and protected by law and society.

Abortion: End late term abortions of choice. Once a child reaches a viable stage abortion can only be for prescribed medical needs.

It is heartening to see an evangelicalsformitt group formed, and to have none other than the 700-Club provide a very friendly forum for him.

Protection of religion as a contributor to the state.

I first came to LDStalk.com after voting for a school board candidate who happened to be LDS. It became an issue when his opponent pointed the affiliation out, suggesting that having three LDS board members would result in a lack of diversity. I was so upset that she would turn religious faith into a negative, that I shot off a letter to the editor, and put a couple campaign signs up in my yard. The incident got me curious, and I ended up here.

My main rationale for voting for the fellow was that, as a person of faith, if I had concerns about tension between the school and my family's religious convictions, he would be far more understanding than someone who saw religion as a potential liability.

4. Community and social service and fellowship. I believe we can have exchanges and firesides where we share ideas on better living, investing, getting out of debt, food storage and other such things. I believe we could work together to clean up public parks and help clean up poor neighborhoods and areas of disasters.

I'd offer much the same answer as #1. Anyone who is doing the work of God is surely doing the work of God. We should applaud and support such wherever we see it.

I think if I lived next to PC I might even mow his lawn someday when he is away on vacation – then deny I knew anything about it. I think I agree with PC – it is time to be better neighbors.

Thanks PC

The Traveler

It looks that bad, huh?

[Elphaba]

Abortion: End late term abortions of choice. Once a child reaches a viable stage abortion can only be for prescribed medical needs.

Hi everyone,

I just wanted to let you know that that Supreme Court already banned all "intact dilation and evacuation," also known as IDX," abortions. The Supreme Court did not allow a health exception for the mother.

There were never very many of these procedures performed anyway, so hopefully not that many woman will be harmed. Hopefully doctors will come up with alternatives when a woman faces the type of medical crisis that in the past would have warranted an IDX.

Just thought you'd like to now you don't have to work on this one.

Elphaba

[Moksha]

I have been intrigued by the Baptists at our Barbecue idea. I broached this with my Bishop a few years back. He more or less pooh poohed the idea because it was new and he wasn't being ordered to do it by his superiors. Still, the idea or a local ward partnering together with some other local congregation of another faith at a potluck or barbecue, in order to establish a greater appreciation of one another seems like a good idea.

In the film they used Baptists, but in real life it might be easier to get acquainted with less hellfire preaching groups such as Lutherans, Episcopalians, Catholics, etc....

If you were ever in a position to do this, have a write up about it in one of the Church publications, so that other wards could emulate your example.

[prisonchaplain]

I just wanted to let you know that that Supreme Court already banned all "intact dilation and evacuation," also known as IDX," abortions. The Supreme Court did not allow a health exception for the mother.

There were never very many of these procedures performed anyway, so hopefully not that many woman will be harmed. Hopefully doctors will come up with alternatives when a woman faces the type of medical crisis that in the past would have warranted an IDX.

I know there is debate about this, but given the small numbers overall, it is easy for me to believe those doctors who say that the procedure is never necessary to protect the mother's life.

[Elphaba]

<div class='quotemain'>

I just wanted to let you know that that Supreme Court already banned all "intact dilation and evacuation," also known as IDX," abortions. The Supreme Court did not allow a health exception for the mother.

There were never very many of these procedures performed anyway, so hopefully not that many woman will be harmed. Hopefully doctors will come up with alternatives when a woman faces the type of medical crisis that in the past would have warranted an IDX.

I know there is debate about this, but given the small numbers overall, it is easy for me to believe those doctors who say that the procedure is never necessary to protect the mother's life.

I have not heard the same thing. However, I sincerely hope you are right. :) It does concern me, but I'm willing to wait and see, and hope.

Elphaba

[Traveler]

Just a note about abortions: A few years back I was involved in a debate on this issue and presented the idea that there are some benefits that could come from abortions. For example it allowed to proceed without hindrances we would eventually eliminate that mentality from the gene pool.

the Traveler

[Elphaba]

Just a note about abortions: A few years back I was involved in a debate on this issue and presented the idea that there are some benefits that could come from abortions. For example it allowed to proceed without hindrances we would eventually eliminate that mentality from the gene pool.

What mentality?

Elphaba

[Alaskagain]

What mentality?

Elphaba

(deleted)

[Traveler]

<div class='quotemain'>Just a note about abortions: A few years back I was involved in a debate on this issue and presented the idea that there are some benefits that could come from abortions. For example it allowed to proceed without hindrances we would eventually eliminate that mentality from the gene pool.

What mentality?

Elphaba

The mentality of logic to value pleasure over the life of another.

The Traveler

[Elphaba]

<div class='quotemain'>

<div class='quotemain'>Just a note about abortions: A few years back I was involved in a debate on this issue and presented the idea that there are some benefits that could come from abortions. For example it allowed to proceed without hindrances we would eventually eliminate that mentality from the gene pool.

What mentality?

Elphaba

The mentality of logic to value pleasure over the life of another.

The Traveler

Okay, I think I just caught on to what you're saying. It took me a while.

You're saying that women choose to have abortions because they would rather have pleasure than children. The more these women have abortions, the fewer children they have. The fewer children they have, the fewer children the next generation has. This next generation's women will have abortions because they choose to have pleasure over children, thus providing even fewer children for the future generation. Each subsequent generation's women continue to have abortions because they choose pleasure over children, and fially the line dies out. Thus, there are no more women to choose pleasure over children.

Do I have it right?

Elphaba

[prisonchaplain]

Elph, I think you got it--and I believe the argument was tongue-in-cheek.

There's another, subtler, but perhaps more important issue that could garner cooperation: teaching abstinence vs. "safe sin." IMHO, teaching "safe sex" is like trying to teach "safe smoking." The newest assault is the claims that abstinence-only programs don't work.

Funny how they give anti-smoking 30 years, and they teach a couple of classes that sex at an early age is wrong, and s few kids do it anyway and get stds, and they are so quick to declare abstinence only a failure.

[Traveler]

<div class='quotemain'>

<div class='quotemain'>

<div class='quotemain'>Just a note about abortions: A few years back I was involved in a debate on this issue and presented the idea that there are some benefits that could come from abortions. For example it allowed to proceed without hindrances we would eventually eliminate that mentality from the gene pool.

What mentality?

Elphaba

The mentality of logic to value pleasure over the life of another.

The Traveler

Okay, I think I just caught on to what you're saying. It took me a while.

You're saying that women choose to have abortions because they would rather have pleasure than children. The more these women have abortions, the fewer children they have. The fewer children they have, the fewer children the next generation has. This next generation's women will have abortions because they choose to have pleasure over children, thus providing even fewer children for the future generation. Each subsequent generation's women continue to have abortions because they choose pleasure over children, and fially the line dies out. Thus, there are no more women to choose pleasure over children.

Do I have it right?

Elphaba

Not just women - children do not happen in a vaccum. Men are more famious for persuing pleasure over the good of children (society).

Must hurry - sitting at an airport catching a plain

The Traveler

[Elphaba]

Traveler:Not just women - children do not happen in a vaccum. Men are more famious for persuing pleasure over the good of children (society).

I see. So there is some sort of genetic connection to men and women who choose pleasure over children? Or do you see it as an absolutely learned behavior? Perhaps both?

I want to make sure I have this right. You're saying, in a particular line, the majority of women will choose to abort the male and female children in order to satisfy their need for pleasure.

This will continue with each subsequent generation of the line, because these women will continue to choose to abort their male and female children in order to satisfy their need for please. Eventually, all of the males and females will be aborted, and the line will be extinct. Is this what you are saying?

Elphaba

Note to Prison Chaplain: PC, I don't think this is tongue-in-cheek. I think he's serious.

[Traveler]

Traveler:Not just women - children do not happen in a vaccum. Men are more famious for persuing pleasure over the good of children (society).

I see. So there is some sort of genetic connection to men and women who choose pleasure over children? Or do you see it as an absolutely learned behavior? Perhaps both?

I want to make sure I have this right. You're saying, in a particular line, the majority of women will choose to abort the male and female children in order to satisfy their need for pleasure.

This will continue with each subsequent generation of the line, because these women will continue to choose to abort their male and female children in order to satisfy their need for please. Eventually, all of the males and females will be aborted, and the line will be extinct. Is this what you are saying?

Elphaba

Note to Prison Chaplain: PC, I don't think this is tongue-in-cheek. I think he's serious.

Evolution is not just biological. There is intellectual, social, political and even economic evolution. If you understand the process of evolution – each generation is in essence playing with the cards (genetic and otherwise) dealt by previous generations. Do you follow this logic?

When a person chooses to abort their children rather than raise and teach them, they cut off any direct contribution they will pass on to the children of the next generation. If you understand the trends of evolution then the continuation of any mind set is throttled (not by its current popularity but) by its access to the next generation. It does not matter how any given mentality is passed on – it must be passed on or the evolution of it will end.

It is a proven principle of evolution – what survives must be instilled in the next generation in a manner that will be passed on to following generations. The most successful at this simple principle of evolution has the highest propensity of survival – or continuing.

So I ask the question. Am I a complete idiot or is there viable logic here – worth passing on to the next generation?

The Traveler

[prisonchaplain]

Why I thought Traveler was being tongue-in-cheek, and obviously was largely wrong. It is true that bad begets bad and good begets good, and yet good parents have bad children, and good people arise out of bad parenting situations.

The children of godly parents, mostly godly themselves, sometimes give in to youthful passion, and then, out of shame and the temptation to cover up a bad mistake, they succumb to temptation, and abort "the mistake."

Sinners do not kill themselves off, nor fail to procreate sufficiently. Only the final judgement will do that.

[Elphaba]

Evolution is not just biological. There is intellectual, social, political and even economic evolution. If you understand the process of evolution – each generation is in essence playing with the cards (genetic and otherwise) dealt by previous generations. Do you follow this logic?

Sure, let's play.

When a person chooses to abort a fetus their children than raise and teach them, they cut off any direct contribution they will pass on to the children of the next generation. If you understand the trends of evolution then the continuation of any mind set is throttled (not by its current popularity but) by its access to the next generation. It does not matter how any given mentality is passed on – it must be passed on or the evolution of it will end.

When a person chooses to abort a fetus rather than let it starve, subject it to rage, violence, abandonment and/or cold-hearted neglect, she stops the cycle of abuse the child would have passed to the next generation. If you understand the trends of evolution then the continuation of any mind set, including subjecting a baby to horrific circumstances is perpetuated to the next generation. It does not matter how any given mentality is passed on, but if it is not passed on, the abuse wil end.

It is a proven principle of evolution – what survives must be instilled in the next generation in a manner that will be passed on to following generations. The most successful at this simple principle of evolution has the highest propensity of survival – or continuing.

It is a proven principle of evolution--what survives but starves, is beaten, poor, neglected, and hated by society must be instilled in this next generation in a manner that will be passed on to the following generations. The most successful at these simple principles of evolution have no chance of survival -- or continuing. Why make them suffer in the first place?

So I ask the question. Am I a complete idiot or is there viable logic here – worth passing on to the next generation?

Oh, no. Not at all.

I realize there are other options than abortion. But your simplistic and absurd scenario of women having abortions because they choose pleasure over life is gross and ignorant. Does it happen? Yes.

Is it the only reason? The fact that I have to ask you that question is a tragedy.

Elphaba

[Traveler]

I realize there are other options than abortion. But your simplistic and absurd scenario of women having abortions because they choose pleasure over life is gross and ignorant. Does it happen? Yes.

Is it the only reason? The fact that I have to ask you that question is a tragedy.

Elphaba

I like to keep things as simple as possible. Perhaps you can help me to understand you view of tragedy. Please explain to me how a man and a woman that honor and respect each other for their manhood and womanhood and who truly love and honor themselves (as Shakespeare said – “to thine own self be true and it shall follow as the night the day - thou cannot be false to any man") – could come to the conclusion, as you have done and decide that any critter in all the universe that is as much as possible, like them, more than any other living thing, should never be borne. If they truly believe such a thing – maybe they are right; maybe such thing or kind of a thing should not ever be borne.

I do not understand why anyone would support and uphold or even argue for such a mentality.

The problem is not with the child - requiring the child to give it life to solve the problem of the parents is not the bright choice of a society that understand the importance of the next generation.

The Traveler

[Elphaba]

Perhaps you can help me to understand you view of tragedy

I just gave you some examples of tragedy. Tell me what you thought of them, and that will tell me if you're really truly interested in learning another reason why women have abortions other than "just to have pleasure."

Please explain to me how a man and a woman that honor and respect each other for their manhood and womanhood and who truly love and honor themselves (as Shakespeare said – “to thine own self be true and it shall follow as the night the day - thou cannot be false to any man") – could come to the conclusion, as you have done and decide that any critter in all the universe that is as much as possible, like them, more than any other living thing, should never be borne.

The couple you describe here would most likely never have to make that decision, at least not for the same reasons I described. And that is obvious from my last post to someone who truly wants to understand. You think they are the only kind of people who get pregnant?

Also, please explain to me how this couple relates to your couple who choose to abort a child because they'd rather have "pleassure."

If they truly believe such a thing – maybe they are right; maybe such thing or kind of a thing should not ever be borne.

I never said they would believe such a thing. Don't put words into my mouth.

I do not understand why anyone would support and uphold or even argue for such a mentality.

Do you truly want to understand or are we just doing a dance here?

The problem is not with the child - requiring the child to give it life to solve the problem of the parents is not the bright choice of a society that understand the importance of the next generation.

And forcing a mother to give birth to a baby that, for whatever reasons, she knows she can't take care of is not the brightest choice of a society that understands the importance of the next generation either. Because once that child that you insist be born is here, it will most likely be abandoned to a life of cruelty, starvation, poverty, neglect and hatred. But hey, the baby was born.

I understand adoption is a viable option and should be used in these situations. In fact I wish every woman who finds herself with an unwanted pregnancy would adopt.

Unfortunately, these things are complicated. Babies growing in their mommy's tummies for nine months can't be ignored and it creates a bond. Once the little one is born, the mother feels this rush of fierce love and suddenly thinks she's going to be different! "I can take care of him. I won't let anybody hurt him." "I can be a good mother to him." I'll figure out a way to take care of him!" "He's mine!"

So, you are no one to judge. Not because you disagree with abortion, but because you don't want to understand why a woman would have an abortion, other than, of course, to have pleasure.

Elphaba

[a-train]

So now we are honoring PC with a good ol' abortion debate....

[Elphaba]

So now we are honoring PC with a good ol' abortion debate....

For me, it's not an "abortion debate."

I have no desire to change anyone's mind about whether or not they think abortion is right or wrong.

For me, it is a discussion about perspective.

It is a discussion about why a woman would choose to have an abortion that goes beyond "convenience," or as Traveler said, "for pleasure."

It is a discussion to hopefully help people (Traveler) become aware of the realities thousands of women face when making this heart-wrenching decision. It's rarely as easy as many people think--nor should it be.

Elphaba