Fair Mormon: another source for answers to questions about lds faith

[anatess2]

21 minutes ago, Snigmorder said:

Calling it rhetoric gone amok does little to shed light on why it's rhetoric gone amok.

Because this kind of broadbrush painting is why we are in the horrid political climate we live in today.

To say that the Democrat Party and the American left are not required to reach a correct position is denigrating an entire group of people as a collective for the sins of the loud and vocal few who are trying their hardest to hold the reigns of their power by any means necessary.  It's basically the same as Democrats calling Republicans racists - which is hilarious that Republicans now call Trumpsters racists.  Like they haven't learned anything from that experience.

 

Edited September 5, 2017 by anatess2

[Snigmorder]

1 hour ago, MormonGator said:

They probably don't like you either. 

Oh, they'd call me a racist or something.

[Snigmorder]

1 hour ago, anatess2 said:

Because this kind of broadbrush painting is why we are in the horrid political climate we live in today.

To say that the Democrat Party and the American left are not required to reach a correct position is denigrating an entire group of people as a collective for the sins of the loud and vocal few who are trying their hardest to hold the reigns of their power by any means necessary.  It's basically the same as Democrats calling Republicans racists - which is hilarious that Republicans now call Trumpsters racists.  Like they haven't learned anything from that experience.

 

If you can name a single truth which could have only been reached by a left of center viewpoint, I'll reconsider my position. You might say the term "left of center viewpoint is too vague." As far as I'm concerned, it's all gradient, it's all gateway.

I shall also add that I did not vote for Trump and I am not affiliated with any party.

 

Edited September 5, 2017 by Snigmorder

[anatess2]

3 minutes ago, Snigmorder said:

If you can name a single truth which could have only been reached by a left of center viewpoint, I'll reconsider my position. You might say the term "left of center viewpoint is too vague." As far as I'm concerned, it's all gradient, it's all gateway.

I shall also add that I did not vote for Trump and I am not affiliated with any party.

 

Well, if I could, I would have voted for Trump.  So there's that.

Let's put it this way... without the LEFT, you wouldn't have the United States of America.  You'd be, the American States of the United Kingdom.

[Snigmorder]

1 minute ago, anatess2 said:

Well, if I could, I would have voted for Trump.  So there's that.

Let's put it this way... without the LEFT, you wouldn't have the United States of America.  You'd be, the American States of the United Kingdom.

Are you using "Left" in the traditional sense or in the American sense? 

[anatess2]

16 minutes ago, Snigmorder said:

Are you using "Left" in the traditional sense or in the American sense? 

Both.

There's no difference between Right and Left when it comes to that.  Americans changed the definition of Liberal, so the rest of the world (including myself who is a liberal but would never use that word while in the USA) had to adopt and call themselves Classic Liberals which is different from American Liberals.  And the reason why Liberal changed in the USA is because of the State versus the Federal governments.  Liberals want individual liberty from government (States), but in this quest, the Democrats used the Federal government to do so - exchanging one government for another.

In any democracy, the Left is ALWAYS the side of freedom from government.  The Right is ALWAYS the side of government.  In the US, the Left and Right are bound inside the Constitution.  The FAR left are the ones who wants to burn the Constitution.  They only represent a small faction of the Left.  I would say, comparable to the number of neo-Nazis on the Right.

So, when Left and Right are bound within the Constitution - then the Left and Right are simply different methods to achieve the same Constitutional goals of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Edited September 5, 2017 by anatess2

[Grunt]

27 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

So, when Left and Right are bound within the Constitution - then the Left and Right are simply different methods to achieve the same Constitutional goals of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

1

Not all methods of goal pursuit are constitutional.

[Sunday21]

How did we get from FairMormon to revolution? You guys are some dangerous! Just kidding...

[Snigmorder]

11 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

Both.

There's no difference between Right and Left when it comes to that.  Americans changed the definition of Liberal, so the rest of the world (including myself who is a liberal but would never use that word while in the USA) had to adopt and call themselves Classic Liberals which is different from American Liberals.  And the reason why Liberal changed in the USA is because of the State versus the Federal governments.  Liberals want individual liberty from government (States), but in this quest, the Democrats used the Federal government to do so - exchanging one government for another.

In any democracy, the Left is ALWAYS the side of freedom from government.  The Right is ALWAYS the side of government.  In the US, the Left and Right are bound inside the Constitution.  The FAR left are the ones who wants to burn the Constitution.  They only represent a small faction of the Left.  I would say, comparable to the number of neo-Nazis on the Right.

So, when Left and Right are bound within the Constitution - then the Left and Right are simply different methods to achieve the same Constitutional goals of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

I don't agree with characterizing the left as "freedom from government." In politics, the "left-wing" is opposed to the current regime and the "right-wing" desires to maintain or support the regime. 

In the Weimar Republic, the NSDAP was left wing. In NSDAP Germany, the NSDAP was right wing. Anyone who opposed the NSDAP in NSDAP Germany was left wing. 

Now, these definitions are meaningless in the United States (unless were dealing with someone trying to compare Hitler to the Republicans because they are both "right wing")

Let's get something straight right now, and you're free to point out evidence to the contrary. There's not a single left of center position which does not in someway contradict eternal truth. You could point out a single principal or single position.  But these principles and positions are not isolated, they are not in a vacuum. They are part of a Web, a worldview. And this web, this worldview, is synthesized from fundamental principles.

 Take abortion for example. Take someone who calls himself pro-choice. They might cite principles of freedom or what have you. But follow the web back to the source of this position, this pro-choice, and you will find that it is bankrupt. That it contradicts the most fundamental realities of this universe. And if something is not ultimately true it did not come from Christ for all truth enters the earth through Christ.

There's not a single true root or foundation in the American left as it stands today. We know about the Frankfurt school, we know about critical theory, we know how the Marxist have infiltrated academia, and we know their motives for doing so. This is not a mystery, it is not a theory, it is history and it is demonstrable in the left. And these things did not come from Christ. They came from a source of opposition, of contrarianism.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Sunday21 said:

How did we get from FairMormon to revolution? You guys are some dangerous! Just kidding...

You see... uhmmm... FairMormon... is ... uhmmm....  I got nuthin'.

Edited September 5, 2017 by Guest

[anatess2]

1 hour ago, Snigmorder said:

I don't agree with characterizing the left as "freedom from government." In politics, the "left-wing" is opposed to the current regime and the "right-wing" desires to maintain or support the regime.

In the Weimar Republic, the NSDAP was left wing. In NSDAP Germany, the NSDAP was right wing. Anyone who opposed the NSDAP in NSDAP Germany was left wing. 

Hello... "opposed to the current regime" is the same as "freedom from the current regime" - which is the government in democracies.  It doesn't matter, therefore, what party you're with.  And that is how Left is not synonymous to Liberal.

 

1 hour ago, Snigmorder said:

Now, these definitions are meaningless in the United States (unless were dealing with someone trying to compare Hitler to the Republicans because they are both "right wing")

Let's get something straight right now, and you're free to point out evidence to the contrary. There's not a single left of center position which does not in someway contradict eternal truth. You could point out a single principal or single position.  But these principles and positions are not isolated, they are not in a vacuum. They are part of a Web, a worldview. And this web, this worldview, is synthesized from fundamental principles.

 Take abortion for example. Take someone who calls himself pro-choice. They might cite principles of freedom or what have you. But follow the web back to the source of this position, this pro-choice, and you will find that it is bankrupt. That it contradicts the most fundamental realities of this universe. And if something is not ultimately true it did not come from Christ for all truth enters the earth through Christ.

There's not a single true root or foundation in the American left as it stands today. We know about the Frankfurt school, we know about critical theory, we know how the Marxist have infiltrated academia, and we know their motives for doing so. This is not a mystery, it is not a theory, it is history and it is demonstrable in the left. And these things did not come from Christ. They came from a source of opposition, of contrarianism.

Fine, I'll take Pro-Choice since you brought it up.  Jesus, of course, is Pro-Choice (Free Agency).  We already know that.  So that position is plainly not morally bankrupt and do not contradict eternal truth.

Now, here's the contradiction.  The LDS Church do not believe that abortion is murder.  So, an LDS person who blanket states that abortion is contrary to eternal truth is, right off the bat, an extremist. 

The Catholic Church believes that all abortion is a sin.  There are no exceptions.  So, a devout Catholic Left-Winger is not somebody who thinks people should go abort their babies.  Rather, he merely states that it is not the government's job to settle the matter but the job of every individual faced with the circumstance.  Freedom from government, see?

Edited September 5, 2017 by anatess2

[Snigmorder]

15 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

Hello... "opposed to the current regime" is the same as "freedom from the current regime" - which is the government in democracies.  It doesn't matter, therefore, what party you're with.  And that is how Left is not synonymous to Liberal.

"Freedom from government" is not a useful term in describing what the left-wing is. "Freedom from government" sounds more like a description of libertarianism or anarchism. "Left-wing" opposes the current regime. This says nothing about their motives for such a position.

15 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

Now, here's the contradiction.  The LDS Church do not believe that abortion is murder.  So, an LDS person who blanket states that abortion is contrary to eternal truth is, right off the bat, an extremist. 

"Human life is a sacred gift from God. Elective abortion for personal or social convenience is contrary to the will and the commandments of God. Church members who submit to, perform, encourage, pay for, or arrange for such abortions may lose their membership in the Church." - lDS.org

Aside from this, I don't care what the church chooses to make official or not. God was once a man on an earth, yet this has not been made official doctrine. There are even people in the church who don't believe God was once a man on an earth. They are wrong. 

20 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

Fine, I'll take Pro-Choice since you brought it up.  Jesus, of course, is Pro-Choice (Free Agency).  We already know that.  So that position is plainly not morally bankrupt and do not contradict eternal truth.

The public relations moniker "pro-choice" and the divinely facilitated environment wherein moral choices can be made have absolutely nothing whatever to do with each other.

In the former, the choice was already made, and that was to support abortion. There is a whole myriad of immorality which is appendage to abortion. The worst of which being the murder of human beings as birth control for fornication. An absolute ransacking of the holy body and a mockery of the law.

Don't tell me this practice has some kind of eternal truth behind it because it makes an evil choice easier "and therefore agency."

 

[Guest MormonGator]

4 hours ago, Snigmorder said:

Oh, they'd call me a racist or something.

You are a racist. You hate white people. That's why we never got along. 

@Carborendum hates Asian people

@Sunday21 hates Canadians

@Backroads hates women.
@LiterateParakeet hates liberals. 
@mirkwood hates everyone. 

So yeah. Lots of hate on this forum. 

Edited September 5, 2017 by MormonGator

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

1 hour ago, MormonGator said:

You are a racist. You hate white people. That's why we never got along. 

@Carborendum hates Asian people

@Sunday21 hates Canadians

@Backroads hates women.
@LiterateParakeet hates liberals. 
@mirkwood hates everyone. 

So yeah. Lots of hate on this forum. 

LOL, yep we're a hateful group alright.

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

9 hours ago, anatess2 said:

Now this... this is a perfect example of political rhetoric gone amok.  The extremists are not all on the left folks!

I agree...and that's all I'm going to say about that.   

[Snigmorder]

9 minutes ago, LiterateParakeet said:

I agree...and that's all I'm going to say about that.   

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

@Snigmorder  LOL!  

[mirkwood]

4 hours ago, MormonGator said:

You are a racist. You hate white people. That's why we never got along. 

@Carborendum hates Asian people

@Sunday21 hates Canadians

@Backroads hates women.
@LiterateParakeet hates liberals. 
@mirkwood hates everyone. 

So yeah. Lots of hate on this forum. 

Did you just compare me to Henry Rollins?

[Guest]

13 hours ago, MormonGator said:

@Carborendum hates Asian people

Ironically, you don't know how true this statement could be.  Most Asian cultures are highly nationalistic.  Chinese/Japanese/Koreans do not often get along.  Many hate each other more than they'd hate someone of a different race entirely.

That's why @anatess2 and I are ALWAYS yelling at each other.

13 hours ago, MormonGator said:

@mirkwood hates everyone. 

As long as he's an equal opportunity hater, that's fair.

[anatess2]

16 hours ago, Snigmorder said:

"Freedom from government" is not a useful term in describing what the left-wing is. "Freedom from government" sounds more like a description of libertarianism or anarchism. "Left-wing" opposes the current regime. This says nothing about their motives for such a position.

"Human life is a sacred gift from God. Elective abortion for personal or social convenience is contrary to the will and the commandments of God. Church members who submit to, perform, encourage, pay for, or arrange for such abortions may lose their membership in the Church." - lDS.org

Aside from this, I don't care what the church chooses to make official or not. God was once a man on an earth, yet this has not been made official doctrine. There are even people in the church who don't believe God was once a man on an earth. They are wrong. 

The public relations moniker "pro-choice" and the divinely facilitated environment wherein moral choices can be made have absolutely nothing whatever to do with each other.

In the former, the choice was already made, and that was to support abortion. There is a whole myriad of immorality which is appendage to abortion. The worst of which being the murder of human beings as birth control for fornication. An absolute ransacking of the holy body and a mockery of the law.

Don't tell me this practice has some kind of eternal truth behind it because it makes an evil choice easier "and therefore agency."

 

Sigh.  That's your POLITICAL position.  Not everyone who DISAGREES with you is devoid of eternal truth.

The government is not the arbiters of morality.  The government being used as arbiters of morality is a Conservative position.  Others disagree with that position and that doesn't make them evil nor wrong nor unworthy LDS.  Liberals (Libertarian is, by the way, classic Liberal) believe morality rests with the Individual.  I, for one, believe that a government being used as arbiters of morality is good only until the majority vote turns immoral that's why my natural position is to be skeptical of government-mandated morality.  Yes, that is a left-wing position.  No, I don't use the label Left-wing or Liberal to identify myself in the USA only because those words are used to associate with the stupid Democratic Party leadership.  The Democratic Party leadership are the kind of people who would support AntiFa as an anti-fascist group.  The hypocrisy of that label is astounding and that is basically the MO of the Democratic Party - the label is all that matters.  Like Dreamers.  Gag.

Until the government declares a fetus a PERSON, abortion will always be fought on Individual Liberty.  I am more pro-life than the average LDS.  I don't believe in using abortion to address the "exceptions".  But I do believe that Conservatives have no leg to stand on when it comes to abortion UNTIL they get the government to declare a fetus a person.  That bill has not even passed Utah... couldn't even make it out of the petitions and into the ballot box.  And that is not because the majority of Utahns are evil people.  No, the majority of Utahns simply believe that the government should get out of people's lives.  I do support a Personhood bill.  But yes, there are a lot of unintended consequences for that if it is not done right - for example, so if the fetus is a person, then the fetus can sue.  That may be a consequence that unrolls a whole silo of yarn.

And that's where your views become extremist.  You believe that the government should be able to force everyone to be moral people at the point of the gun and moral people who don't want the government telling them to be moral people are in cahoots with the devil.

 

Edited September 6, 2017 by anatess2

[anatess2]

1 hour ago, Carborendum said:

Ironically, you don't know how true this statement could be.  Most Asian cultures are highly nationalistic.  Chinese/Japanese/Koreans do not often get along.  Many hate each other more than they'd hate someone of a different race entirely.

That's why @anatess2 and I are ALWAYS yelling at each other.

As long as he's an equal opportunity hater, that's fair.

South Koreans are the exception.  They're very nationalistic but they like to pretend they're westerners....

We Filipinos... we're still confused if we're really Asians.  Like Indians.  They wanna be sand ninjas but ninjas keep on calling them middle easterners. 

 

[Guest]

Just now, anatess2 said:

South Koreans are the exception.  They're very nationalistic but they like to pretend they're westerners....

Yeah, but they're a couple decades behind.  Recent visits to Seoul make you think you're in the 80s or 90s America for the fashion choices.

As far as exceptions... Heck, Japanese are more nationalistic that Koreans.  And North Korea feels so friggin' superior that they're playing a nuclear cat and mouse game with the US with Trump at the helm.  Say, goodnight, Kim.

And Chinese are also highly nationalistic.  But I'm not as familiar with their culture to know where they fit on the scale.  But they are.

[anatess2]

1 minute ago, Carborendum said:

Yeah, but they're a couple decades behind.  Recent visits to Seoul make you think you're in the 80s or 90s America for the fashion choices.

I know, right?  I mean... the gender-bending Duran-Duran look on the young men are quite cute.  Yes, I love Duran-Duran.  Sue me. 

 

1 minute ago, Carborendum said:

As far as exceptions... Heck, Japanese are more nationalistic that Koreans.  And North Korea feels so friggin' superior that they're playing a nuclear cat and mouse game with the US with Trump at the helm.  Say, goodnight, Kim.

And Chinese are also highly nationalistic.  But I'm not as familiar with their culture to know where they fit on the scale.  But they are.

Chinese and Japanese are both up there.  I just watched Ip Man again a few days ago and that movie always makes me laugh when the Chinese said they'll never teach their martial art to the Japanese because the Japanese are evil.  By the way, Ip Man was super duper popular in China.  It was like Yeah man!  Chinese pride!  But yeah, I still believe Kim is the Chinese tail that wags the western dog.  They would be stupid to wag the current pit bull in the White House.

 

[Guest MormonGator]

2 hours ago, Carborendum said:

Ironically, you don't know how true this statement could be.  Most Asian cultures are highly nationalistic.  Chinese/Japanese/Koreans do not often get along.  Many hate each other more than they'd hate someone of a different race entirely.

That's why @anatess2 and I are ALWAYS yelling at each other.

As long as he's an equal opportunity hater, that's fair.

If it makes you feel better, I hate all English people with Irish last names. 

[zil]

4 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

If it makes you feel better, I hate all English people with Irish last names. 

How about people of English descent who married people of German descent who took Scottish names to escape the rest of their family?