Tattoos and Other Things We Could Use More of at Church

[a mustard seed]

11 hours ago, Maureen said:

If you take the tobacco farmer example literally, then I would assume that the farmer chose tobacco for survival purposes. What's more reasonable, making a living off of $100 or $10,000. And why would tobacco farming not be an honest living, growing tobacco is not against the law. And due to the negative view of cigarette smoking, I'm sure tobacco revenue has suffered. Just because tobacco can be harmful in certain ways doesn't mean it has to be harmful in everything. Tobacco can be modified and used as biofuel. It doesn't always have to be either all good or all bad.

M.

"Against the law" does not equate to an honest living where someone grows crop that contributes to the deterioration of people's health, for profit. If the tobacco farmer decided to only sell to companies that want it for "biofuel" then there would be no problem, obviously. Nobody would question that farmer's life choices, although we might call him on it being "more profitable" to be a tobacco farmer in that case than any other farmer. Because when the tobacco farmer says, "I make more money growing tobacco than any other crop" the obvious implication is that the money comes from the high demand of cigarette companies and manufacturers for that crop. Intuitively, this is just a guess, but I doubt the demand for tobacco as biofuel measures up enough to make tobacco more profitable than growing anything else.

[NeuroTypical]

12 hours ago, Maureen said:

If you take the tobacco farmer example literally, then I would assume that the farmer chose tobacco for survival purposes. What's more reasonable, making a living off of $100 or $10,000. And why would tobacco farming not be an honest living, growing tobacco is not against the law.

I don't think anyone is saying tobacco farming isn't an honest living.  We're talking about spiritual shoulds, not legal cans.  And yeah, I'm also having a hard time figuring out why you're not getting that mormons would have an issue with a mormon growing tobacco.

True story: I was assigned to go home teach a guy who was sort of hard to find at church.  He came mainly because his wife wanted him to.  As we got to know him, we found out that he had been rather turned off church due to a bad experience involving a bunch of people passionately arguing at each other about some fringe point of contentious doctrine.  But he did love his wife, so he was trying to make church work.  He let us know a buddy was offering him an opportunity to own a bar, and wanted to know what we thought of that.  I told him that bar or no bar, he and his wife were welcome to sit with my family at church.  He might have a hard time getting a temple recommend, but ultimately, it was up to each of us to choose the roads that life presented us, and all I would do was ask him to think about what choices God wanted him to make.    He didn't buy the bar, and did several years as a temple worker with his wife.   We've become good friends.  He's had many spiritual ups and downs, but even at his low points he tells me he made the right choice.  

Edited October 29, 2017 by NeuroTypical

[Maureen]

28 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

I don't think anyone is saying tobacco farming isn't an honest living.  We're talking about spiritual shoulds, not legal cans.  And yeah, I'm also having a hard time figuring out why you're not getting that mormons would have an issue with a mormon growing tobacco....

I inferred that a certain poster was saying exactly that, even though she insisted that she was not concerned about the tobacco farmer only about the money he was making from it; which based on @Traveler's example wasn't much.

My point was that as society changes things evolve with it. Who knows, maybe in 50 years smoking will be extinct, but the tobacco plant will still exist and by then it may be used for something that even Mormons won't find distasteful.

M.

[Guest MormonGator]

1 hour ago, NeuroTypical said:

 mormons would have an issue with a mormon growing tobacco.

May I grow a certain substance that has made Colorado famous? @Vort gave me some gardening tips...

[NightSG]

3 hours ago, mirkwood said:

Are you trying to tell me you don't see how LDS would view another LDS selling tobacco as not making an honest living?  *smh*

That would be the height of hypocrisy considering how many view MLM scams and selling fad diets as an honest living.

[Grunt]

3 minutes ago, NightSG said:

That would be the height of hypocrisy considering how many view MLM scams and selling fad diets as an honest living.

That's so true.  I was talking to a friend in Texas last month who is involved in something similar.  I researched it to find it was run by an LDS member.  I found it odd, but not for me to judge. I have box of keurig pods on the counter.  I'm too busy with my own sins.

[Guest MormonGator]

21 minutes ago, NightSG said:

That would be the height of hypocrisy

We are all hypocrites to one degree or another. 

Christians are given a bad rap. If we make any moral claim, some genius can come back and say "Well who are you to judge? After all, you smoke cigarettes!" or "Who are you to judge you _________ (insert random character flaw)" Maybe we shouldn't judge murderers and bank robbers. 

 

Edited October 29, 2017 by MormonGator

[Grunt]

15 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

We are all hypocrites to one degree or another. 

Christians are given a bad rap. If we make any moral claim, some genius can come back and say "Well who are you to judge? After all, you smoke cigarettes!" or "Who are you to judge you _________ (insert random character flaw)" Maybe we shouldn't judge murderers and bank robbers. 

 

One is judging the obeyance of God's law.  That is for him, or those he has given authority, to do.  The other is judging man's law.

[NightSG]

56 minutes ago, Grunt said:

That's so true.  I was talking to a friend in Texas last month who is involved in something similar.  I researched it to find it was run by an LDS member.  I found it odd, but not for me to judge. I have box of keurig pods on the counter.  I'm too busy with my own sins.

I'd have to say the scams are far worse overall; others are harmed by dishonesty, (both immediately by taking their money under false pretenses, and long term in the case of the fad diets and "health supplements," which keep turning out to have adverse health effects) and it's generally a long-term premeditated act.  Even if you spend months planning out your next cup of coffee and how you'll avoid the missionaries catching you with it, that's still only harming yourself.

[Grunt]

3 minutes ago, NightSG said:

 Even if you spend months planning out your next cup of coffee and how you'll avoid the missionaries catching you with it, that's still only harming yourself.

 

I've never been one to hide my sins.  Everyone has it in one form or another.

[zil]

3 hours ago, Maureen said:

I inferred that a certain poster was saying exactly that, even though she insisted that she was not concerned about the tobacco farmer only about the money he was making from it

:: shakes head :: go back and re-read until you catch on - it's not about whether he chooses to grow tobacco; it's not about how much money he does or does not make growing tobacco; it's about saying that "more money" justifies the choice to grow tobacco.  If you cannot distinguish between those three things, then just agree that you don't understand the point I'm making.

[Traveler]

48 minutes ago, zil said:

:: shakes head :: go back and re-read until you catch on - it's not about whether he chooses to grow tobacco; it's not about how much money he does or does not make growing tobacco; it's about saying that "more money" justifies the choice to grow tobacco.  If you cannot distinguish between those three things, then just agree that you don't understand the point I'm making.

 

My concern is not about some non-member that grows tobacco – my concern is someone that criticizes someone that has not yet made any covenant with G-d concerning how their money is made and then themselves think themselves better off because they have made a covenant – that is broken with what they see or think of as minor infractions of that covenant that is much less then growing tobacco.

As an additional note – I was working (some years back) for an automation and robotics company that sent me as their employee to a Philip Morris tobacco processing plant to help them make more money creating tobacco products.  I had a long discussion with my bishop and was (in essence) counseled to keep my job, continue to support my family, pay my bills and continue to pay my tithing.  I took every opportunity to let our customer know I was not happy with their product.  Also my bishop was well aware that I was paying tithing on money made from the tobacco industry - not a penny was rejected and given back to me.

 

The Traveler

Edited October 29, 2017 by Traveler

[Traveler]

 

I have been thinking and meditating (among other things) concerning worship at church.  It would seem that our Sunday services are open and intended for all that would come – we should be welcoming to all that would attend.  Of course, our worship serves are intended to espouse doctrine and teachings commensurate to LDS understanding and those that would intend to disrupt our right to worship; should not be allowed to do so.  But I am of firm belief that we should not close our doors to anyone.

But there is a caveat.  Our ordinances are not open for all to participate.  We are told that no one should be allowed to partake of the sacrament ordinance unworthy.   As I understand there is someone placed in authority to govern the worthiness – usually this is the Bishop or if otherwise required the priesthood authority that is presiding.   Anyone can (without disrupting worship serves) make accusation of someone’s worthiness but the denial of ordinance (particularly the sacrament at Sunday services) is the responsibility of the presiding priesthood authority.

I believe this means that we should, as a general rule, be kind, considerate and welcoming to everyone that would worship with us according to our covenant worship.  If we have any question or concern we can address that concern directly to the presiding authority (usually the bishop) at a time and place that will not detract from the reverence and sacredness of our public meetings.  If we are uncomfortable after making our concern know to the presiding authority we can address the next higher authority (stake president) and then finally the general priesthood council for the whole church.

It is also my understand that if someone has been disciplined (excommunicated) that we are not to shun even them or turn them away from our public meetings – but to love and fellowship them within the bounds of our love and compassion.  Whatever discipline is to be rendered is not of our concern and we do not even have right to know all the discipline those in priesthood authority are imposing.  We are not to withdrawal from them or engage in “whispering” (murmuring or gossiping) in any way of un-support with others concerning their wishing to attend our public meetings.

 

The Traveler

[Grunt]

1 hour ago, Traveler said:

 

I have been thinking and meditating (among other things) concerning worship at church.  It would seem that our Sunday services are open and intended for all that would come – we should be welcoming to all that would attend.  Of course, our worship serves are intended to espouse doctrine and teachings commensurate to LDS understanding and those that would intend to disrupt our right to worship; should not be allowed to do so.  But I am of firm belief that we should not close our doors to anyone.

But there is a caveat.  Our ordinances are not open for all to participate.  We are told that no one should be allowed to partake of the sacrament ordinance unworthy.   As I understand there is someone placed in authority to govern the worthiness – usually this is the Bishop or if otherwise required the priesthood authority that is presiding.   Anyone can (without disrupting worship serves) make accusation of someone’s worthiness but the denial of ordinance (particularly the sacrament at Sunday services) is the responsibility of the presiding priesthood authority.

I believe this means that we should, as a general rule, be kind, considerate and welcoming to everyone that would worship with us according to our covenant worship.  If we have any question or concern we can address that concern directly to the presiding authority (usually the bishop) at a time and place that will not detract from the reverence and sacredness of our public meetings.  If we are uncomfortable after making our concern know to the presiding authority we can address the next higher authority (stake president) and then finally the general priesthood council for the whole church.

It is also my understand that if someone has been disciplined (excommunicated) that we are not to shun even them or turn them away from our public meetings – but to love and fellowship them within the bounds of our love and compassion.  Whatever discipline is to be rendered is not of our concern and we do not even have right to know all the discipline those in priesthood authority are imposing.  We are not to withdrawal from them or engage in “whispering” (murmuring or gossiping) in any way of un-support with others concerning their wishing to attend our public meetings.

 

The Traveler

This is what I like about the church and hope to see continue.  It is open to everyone who wants to attend, but they don't beat around the bush as to their beliefs.  That is only if asked, it seems.  They rarely speak about specific sins but instead talk about the blessings of following Christ.  I'm offered the Sacrament every single Sunday, but I pass.  Nobody has ever asked me about it or even mentioned it.  I've never seen anyone else not take the Sacrament, but in all fairness, I never look.  

[NightSG]

1 hour ago, Traveler said:

I took every opportunity to let our customer know I was not happy with their product.  Also my bishop was well aware that I was paying tithing on money made from the tobacco industry - not a penny was rejected and given back to me.

You know, people sometimes say things like this, but I just can't imagine any of the bishops I've known refusing a (checks TX lottery site for the current jackpot) $5.2 million tithing check if it's placed in their hands.

[Guest MormonGator]

2 hours ago, Traveler said:

  Also my bishop was well aware that I was paying tithing on money made from the tobacco industry - not a penny was rejected and given back to me.

I think bishops care more about the spirit of tithing than the dollar amount. 

[Traveler]

2 hours ago, NightSG said:

You know, people sometimes say things like this, but I just can't imagine any of the bishops I've known refusing a (checks TX lottery site for the current jackpot) $5.2 million tithing check if it's placed in their hands.

I know of many bishops that will not accept tithing on money gained through gambling (stock market an exception) or illegal activities. In scriptural terms, this is called filthy lucre.  It may be that the bishop may not realize the money is tainted.

 

The Traveler

[Traveler]

3 hours ago, Grunt said:

This is what I like about the church and hope to see continue.  It is open to everyone who wants to attend, but they don't beat around the bush as to their beliefs.  That is only if asked, it seems.  They rarely speak about specific sins but instead talk about the blessings of following Christ.  I'm offered the Sacrament every single Sunday, but I pass.  Nobody has ever asked me about it or even mentioned it.  I've never seen anyone else not take the Sacrament, but in all fairness, I never look.  

 

I have noticed that most often unless a bishop knows specifics (such as excommunications or disfellowships) that mostly worthiness for accepting the sacrament is left up to the individual.  If a person is in doubt – I suggest they talk to their bishop.  I commend you for your honor and respect but also encourage you to consider carefully becoming a disciple of Christ by covenant and rather than by convenience.

 

The Traveler

[Grunt]

9 minutes ago, Traveler said:

I commend you for your honor and respect but also encourage you to consider carefully becoming a disciple of Christ by covenant and rather than by convenience.

 

The Traveler

 

I have no idea what that means.

[NeuroTypical]

8 hours ago, MormonGator said:

May I grow a certain substance that has made Colorado famous? @Vort gave me some gardening tips...

Hi from smoky Colorado!  Here's a little random slice of various parts of Colorado life:

* Went to a water board meeting and listened to them talk about how some of their biggest headaches come from the illegal grow operations.
* Offered a sympathetic ear to my first counselor in the Bishopric, who had a rental property one day, then heard the cops raided his rental property and shut down an illegal grow op.  He's spent a lot of time and money fixing all the crap they broke.
* This:

* Interacting with people arguing pro-MJ stuff, hearing stuff that sounds a heck of a lot like Maureen's arguments.   (That's right - you heard me - just about every pro-tobacco factoid or argument in existence is actively being pushed hard for MJ  and has for years.)

Edited October 30, 2017 by NeuroTypical

[Vort]

8 hours ago, Traveler said:

My concern is not about some non-member that grows tobacco – my concern is someone that criticizes someone that has not yet made any covenant with G-d concerning how their money is made and then themselves think themselves better off because they have made a covenant – that is broken with what they see or think of as minor infractions of that covenant that is much less then growing tobacco.

@Traveler, I understand your concern. Do you understand that what you have written has exactly zero to do with what @zil wrote about tobacco farmers? Do you understand the one and only point she was trying to make?

[Guest MormonGator]

10 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

Hi from smoky Colorado!  Here's a little random slice of various parts of Colorado life:

* Went to a water board meeting and listened to them talk about how some of their biggest headaches come from the illegal grow operations.
* Offered a sympathetic ear to my first counselor in the Bishopric, who had a rental property one day, then heard the cops raided his rental property and shut down an illegal grow op.  He's spent a lot of time and money fixing all the crap they broke.
* This:

* Interacting with people arguing pro-MJ stuff, hearing stuff that sounds a heck of a lot like Maureen's arguments.   (That's right - you heard me - just about every pro-tobacco factoid or argument in existence is actively being pushed hard for MJ  and has for years.)

So you voted in favor of legalizing it, right? 

[NeuroTypical]

[Traveler]

9 hours ago, Vort said:

@Traveler, I understand your concern. Do you understand that what you have written has exactly zero to do with what @zil wrote about tobacco farmers? Do you understand the one and only point she was trying to make?

 

I understand the point she was attempting to make – it is a point that I sort of agree with.  Except that often there are very few “things” in life which are opened through doors that operate on a single point hinge.  Her point is valid in many situations but a tobacco farmer is a classic exception.  There are many reasons but I will try to make this short.  The character of the tobacco plant and effort to create commercial grade tobacco is not possible for large scale operations – like corn.  20 acres is about max for a profitable operation.  But the profit from corn on a 20 acre operation is not enough to sustain a stable enough long term economy – which means that one bad weather year and he could lose his property.  Two bad weather years and for sure he is bankrupt (meaning the bank now owns his property) and two bad years in a row is likely enough to negate @zil point – rather than go into all the details my response was – obviously Zil’s circle of acquaintances does not include a tobacco farmer.

My tobacco friend farmer hated tobacco but he was trapped and did not believe he had what we would call “agency”.  Perhaps there are better examples – but this one I though presented the paradox well enough that anyone doing the math would realize the problem this individual faced. 

Now I wonder how many people in this life face similar dilemmas when introduced to the gospel.  And how many saints think that the choice to become a covenant saint is no more difficult for everybody else as it was for them. 

Obviously, there are individuals and groups that intend to do our LDS congregations (and sometimes other religious congregations) harm.  My primary point is that regardless of anyone’s intent – when they come to one of our public worship events – we should greet them with love and compassion and do all in our power to diffuse their excuse of hatred.  We should not do what I did to @zil and you and that is – let them think we do not understand or care about them.

 

The Traveler

[zil]

34 minutes ago, Traveler said:

I understand the point she was attempting to make – it is a point that I sort of agree with.

So you say, and yet you're incapable of detaching it from tobacco when I didn't attach it to tobacco in the first place.  Indeed, I detached it from tobacco in the first place and abstracted it into a generic concept.  You write as if you think I want to hunt down your tobacco-farming friend and burn and salt his fields and curse him and his to hell for all eternity.  But that's something you created out of pure (erroneous) assumption and then used to condemn my (made up) lack of understanding, compassion, and acceptance of others (while implying you possess these virtues I lack).

I'm perfectly content to have your tobacco-farming friend continue growing tobacco.

You also write as if I want to do all that because of my membership in the Church and belief in the Word of Wisdom.  Those would be the very reasons not to want those things.  Indeed, those would be good reasons to support your tobacco-farming friend in his choice to grow whatever crop he chooses.

Did I mention I'm perfectly content to have your tobacco-farming friend continue growing tobacco?

My comments were never about tobacco or your friend or your own career choices.  They were about a claim that more money in and of itself justifies a choice, abstracted into a general principle which I find is not supported by reality or scripture.  From Moses 5:

Quote

31 And Cain said: Truly I am Mahan, the master of this great secret, that I may murder and get gain. Wherefore Cain was called Master Mahan, and he gloried in his wickedness.

32 And Cain went into the field, and Cain talked with Abel, his brother. And it came to pass that while they were in the field, Cain rose up against Abel, his brother, and slew him.

33 And Cain gloried in that which he had done, saying: I am free; surely the flocks of my brother falleth into my hands.

(see also the entire Book of Mormon)  ...which does NOT mean I think tobacco farmers are murderers for financial gain, it means that I think "more money justifies my choice" is the same "logic" Cain used, and that it's a dangerous thing to believe.

Would it surprise you to know that I doubt your tobacco-growing friend, or you, made your choices thinking solely that money was the justification for them?  You see, I abstracted a comment attributed to your tobacco-growing friend, rephrased it into a principle or concept, and commented on *that*, not on tobacco, not on your friend, not on you.  But you were too busy condemning me for unfairly applying the Word of Wisdom that you apparently missed it.

If this isn't clear by now, let's all agree to drop it.

If someone wants to know what I think of tobacco-growing and why I think that (hint, the WoW has nothing to do with it [oh my, how can a Mormon say such a thing!?]), feel free to ask.