As a Political Science Major I have always been interested in general Church Views to Political Figures

[estradling75]

1 minute ago, LatterDSaint said:

NO. They were not all there at the party in question where the allegation of attempted rape is said to have happened. I don't know if ANY of them were there, but they are not "witnesses". They are women attesting that Kavanaugh "behaved honorably and treated women with respect" & has "stood out for his friendship, character, and integrity"

If you didn't know someone can behave this way among many women, and behave a different way among one woman, at a party, drunk, with his friends...

Right but you are attacking Kavanaugh character and claiming the alleged rape is more indicative of his character then the testimony sixty five women that knew him personally is.  That is wild nonsense and I hope you never have to face a person acting alleging toward you the way you are acting and alleging toward Kavanaugh

[LatterDSaint]

2 minutes ago, Vort said:

ike facts and rational analysis.

which you clearly lack. But hey, it's within your rights to deny reality lol

[LatterDSaint]

11 minutes ago, estradling75 said:

Right but you are attacking Kavanaugh character and claiming the alleged rape is more indicative of his character then the testimony sixty five women that knew him personally is.  That is wild nonsense and I hope you never have to face a person acting alleging toward you the way you are acting and alleging toward Kavanaugh

Well YEAH. Many people who knew Roy Moore liked him. That didnt mean that the allegations from 5 people that he molested them were false. From your logic here, you presume that those allegations from a minority number of individuals are false... Incredible. If your son or daughter was molested by a sicko and many people who knew the sicko backed him/her would you seriously tell your child "Well a lot more people who know this person say he is a great person and would never do something like this. I will take their attestations over your accusation because you are in the majority"...

Or does your whole reasoning change when someone from your family becomes the accuser? Its common so Im not going to shame you too much for admitting so...

and PS I think lying under oath is more indicative of the plausibility of this allegation considering that Kavanugh categorically and unequivocally denies the allegation....

Edited September 14, 2018 by LatterDSaint

[Just_A_Guy]

54 minutes ago, LatterDSaint said:

[1]. 6% of his official records have been accessed. That is only 6 %. What does he have to hide? Gambling debts? Russian assets? My speculation is not unreasonable because he has not released all of his documents to dispute it. Until he does I can speculate as much as I want. 

[2] Also Kavanaugh has lied under oath multiple times. Aren't we against lying or did it suddenly become a small deal because its a Trump appointee SCOTUS nomination?

1.  You can speculate as much as you want; but those speculations are likely to be biased crap rooted in ignorance and paranoia.  The “official records” being kept private are legal advice that Kavanaugh gave to his client, the White House Counsel’s office.  Kavanaugh, as an attorney, has no legal right to release them.  Moreover, the public has no more right to know about the advice an attorney in the White House Counsel’s office gives to its client, than it has a right to know about the advice a private divorce attorney gives to a single mother; or about a witness credibility issue that an assistant attorney general discusses with a state agency supervisor.  The notion that Kavanaugh—or any attorney—would be discussing private gambling debts or secret handshakes with Russian agents with his client that HAPPENED TO BE THE FREAKING WHITE HOUSE, is beyond laughable.  

2.  I haven’t followed the confirmation hearings closely enough to catch any alleged lies under oath.  If you want to discuss a couple of representative cases, that might be an interesting exchange; but I hope they will exceed the  standard of uninformed and disingenuous mudslinging that you have hitherto set for yourself in this forum.

50 minutes ago, LatterDSaint said:

I seriously do not understand how someone could argue for this. Would you defend criminals in the highest office of your government just because they would promote the "stability in the long run"?

YIKES

Moving the target again.  I’m not saying I defend such a situation; I’m merely stating that a) a lot of legal scholars on both sides of the aisle do; and b) Kavanaugh was willing to defend such a situation even when a Democrat was in the White House—debunking your claim that his position here makes him a “partisan hack”.

31 minutes ago, LatterDSaint said:

WHich kinda makes those 65 signatures worthless lol and grants more credibility to the allegation of attempted rape

Of course not.  They affirmed knowing him during that period while also honestly acknowledging they weren’t in school together.  The accuser, naturally, didn’t go to school with him either.

26 minutes ago, LatterDSaint said:

NO. They were not all there at the party in question where the allegation of attempted rape . . .

You made a key omission on the extract of my post that you provided in the quote box.  In the case of the sixty-five signatories to the letter, I clearly said “character witnesses”.   That has a very specific definition. 

I may not know a lot about Kavanaugh’s honesty, but I’m learning a lot about yours.  

Don’t lie about one of my posts again.  

Edited September 14, 2018 by Just_A_Guy

[estradling75]

58 minutes ago, LatterDSaint said:

Well YEAH. Many people who knew Roy Moore liked him. That didnt mean that the allegations from 5 people that he molested them were false. From your logic here, you presume that those allegations from a minority number of individuals are false... Incredible. If your son or daughter was molested by a sicko and many people who knew the sicko backed him/her would you seriously tell your child "Well a lot more people who know this person say he is a great person and would never do something like this. I will take their attestations over you accusation because they are in the majority"...

Or does your whole reasoning change when someone from your family becomes the accuser? Its common so Im not going to shame you too much for admitting so...

and PS I think lying under oath is more indicative of the plausibility of this allegation considering that Kavanugh categorically and unequivocally denies the allegation....

The thing about standing on principles is they don't change... While my heart would undoubtedly break should one of my loved ones be attacked and make an accusation.. but no your attempt to slander my character fails because I would not change my position. (and there is a huge difference between supporting someone hurting... and getting knives out and going for someone else blood)  In the scripture the Lord has commanded us to seek redress for the wrong done to us by using the Legal system.  (See D&C 101)  Take a moment and read what the Lord does when the Legal system fails (verse 89)...  That is what I want.  I will take his judgement any day of the week.  That is what I want if it is me or my loved ones who are attacked and are the accuser,  and it is what I want if I am the accused.

As for someone being able to be a monster and have good character witness.. well no duh.  That is way we have the Rule of Law to sift through the conflicting information based on evidence, and when/if that fails we have God.  Anything less is anarchy and mob rule and mobs are the opposite of justice   

Edited September 14, 2018 by estradling75

[Vort]

1 hour ago, Just_A_Guy said:

Don’t lie about one of my posts again.

Uh-huh. Good luck with that.

OTOH, you actually do hold the whip hand...

[Lost Boy]

I grew up republican, but am now quite unhappy with the republican party.  I am definitely not happy with the democrats either.

Here is where I stand on issues.

1) Abortion...  I might inflame myself here, but I don't have an issue with the day after pill.  All other forms I am against.  The problem is, who do you punish for having the abortion?  The mother?  the Doctor? both?  After the 50 million or so abortions performed in the U.S., I can't see punishing the mother.  That said I think the U.S. does an abysmal job deterring unwanted pregnancies.  There could be far better education.  And I am all for contraceptives..

2)  Immigration...  One, I would do away with the law allowing those born in the U.S. to be automatically considered U.S. citizens.  Just plain dumb.  But I would make it far easier to immigrate here especially if you have a worthwhile job.  I would create a tax class for immigrants.  I would not tax them social security, but would have a higher income tax rate for them.  I would provide an easier avenue for citizenship for those with skills that show they are a benefit to society.  For current illegals, I would provide a path to amnesty, if they can prove they are a benefit.  And I would come down hard on employers that hire illegals.

3) Medical.  I would set up a two tier medical system.  A basic system that all would pay into that would cover all necessary medical procedures.  Make it no deductible.  Walk in, show them your card and get treatment.  This would cost most of us nothing more than we pay today and most likely would cost a bit less.  In most cases employers would just pay the government instead of an insurance company.  The second tier would be private insurance that would provide a bit better care... private rooms... fancier equipment, etc.

4) Military - I would reduce the military by 50%, possibly 75% over the course of 10-15 years.

5) Infrastructure - definitely increase spending on infrastructure.  Green projects, better roads, etc.

6) Education -  I would establish a set yearly grant for students to attend university or vocational schools.  The money could only be spent at schools that limit their tuition increase to the rate of inflation.  This grant would be a set amount say $12k/year.  If the tuition was less than the $12k, then it could be used for room and board.  The student would have to maintain a minimum of a C average.

7) Minimum wage.   I'd do away with it.  Let compitition drive the price up. 

😎 Welfare..  If you are able bodied, you work.  And if it is city beautification.... picking up garbage, tearing down old building units, etc... so be it.  But preferably government partners with private industry where government would provide funds for private industry to train workers for 6-12 months and then private industry would then hire the person.  If they did not, they would not be eligible to participate in the program for 2 years.

9) Holidays....  I would require employers to provide a minimum of 3 weeks vacation in addition to current official holidays.

10) Dump corporate tax all together and just do personal income tax.

I am pretty sure I don't fit well in either party, nor would I fit well in the libertarian party either.

I didn't vote Trump nor Clinton because I have very negative views of each.  I would like to be out of the world police business.  Stop giving aid to countries in the middle east including Israel. 

 

[LatterDSaint]

4 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

They affirmed knowing him during that period while also honestly acknowledging they weren’t in school together.  The accuser, naturally, didn’t go to school with him either.

So all of them had just as much chance of getting sexually assaulted by Kavanaugh. It just so happens that 1 out if 66 women  do not see him as this morally righteous judge who would never do anything like what she alleged he did...

 

4 hours ago, estradling75 said:

(and there is a huge difference between supporting someone hurting... and getting knives out and going for someone else blood) 

knives? blood? lol

Are those your adjectives to describe preventing a supreme court nominee from being confirmed? hahaha

4 hours ago, estradling75 said:

That is way we have the Rule of Law to sift through the conflicting information based on evidence, and when/if that fails we have God.  Anything less is anarchy and mob rule and mobs are the opposite of justice   

interesting point. Mob rule however will always be a product of a corrupt government....

 

4 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

I may not know a lot about Kavanaugh’s honesty, but I’m learning a lot about yours.  

my honesty will always be greater than the individual currently in office. That is a fact. I hope yours would be greater as well

4 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

 I clearly said “character witnesses”

My bad. My response was invalid here. I definitely selectively read "witnesses" on its own 

[Just_A_Guy]

1 hour ago, LatterDSaint said:

[1] So all of them had just as much chance of getting sexually assaulted by Kavanaugh. It just so happens that 1 out if 66 women  do not see him as this morally righteous judge who would never do anything like what she alleged he did...

. . . .

[2] My bad. My response was invalid here. I definitely selectively read "witnesses" on its own 

1.  True enough.  But as for that one . . . what was her name, again?   

If she came forward publicly, we could at least have a ball game.  But as it is, all we’ve got is an anonymous accuser and sixty-seven named defenders.  In this day and age (I could literally recruit a woman to make an anonymous rape accusation against you in under half an hour; and I daresay you could do the same to me) it is the credibility of the accusations, not their mere existence, that has to be determinative here.  And so far, re Kavanaugh—we have virtually nothing to establish the accuser’s credibility. 

2.  I appreciate that; thanks.  

Edited September 15, 2018 by Just_A_Guy

[NeuroTypical]

Discussion won.

[estradling75]

3 hours ago, LatterDSaint said:

knives? blood? lol

Are those your adjectives to describe preventing a supreme court nominee from being confirmed? hahaha

interesting point. Mob rule however will always be a product of a corrupt government....

Those are my adjectives used to how most men would likely feel if one of their loved ones is attacked or even raped.  Which if you remember correctly was exactly the position you wanted me to it expound on.

I fully acknowledge I would feel that way... and I fully acknowledge it would be wrong to act in anyway on those feelings..  Because per the scriptures in it not my place to hand out judgment and/or punishment.  Something you seem to have a no problem doing as long it matches your political preferences

Edited September 15, 2018 by estradling75

[LatterDSaint]

22 minutes ago, estradling75 said:

Something you seem to have a no problem doing as long it matches your political preferences

come again? I dont mind Hillary getting sent to prison. Not because I dislike her but because she is corrupt shill. Everyone can admit that, even left leaning individuals like myself. But if she gets sent to jail then Trump should be sent to Guantanamo..

Just curious, is it false judgement on my behalf to believe that unless Trump repents he wont even reach the telestial kingdom of glory? As a member of the LDS Church am I wrong to have this view of Trump considering his immoral character. Of course if he died today, it would not be up to me, but I would have a pretty good idea.... and I fully acknowledge that we are all sinners, but I would have to try REALLY hard to do and say half of what Trump does...

Somehow I get the feeling that some LDS republicans believe Trump would reach the Celestial kingdom of glory just because he was elected president. Not necessarily you, but nonetheless I would like to confirm...

Edited September 15, 2018 by LatterDSaint

[Vort]

17 minutes ago, LatterDSaint said:

Somehow I get the feeling that some LDS republicans believe Trump would reach the Celestial kingdom of glory just because he was elected president.

Eye dee ten tee warning.

[estradling75]

6 hours ago, LatterDSaint said:

Somehow I get the feeling that some LDS republicans believe Trump would reach the Celestial kingdom of glory just because he was elected president. Not necessarily you, but nonetheless I would like to confirm...

Seriously what part of ' not my place to hand out judgment and/or punishment' does not already answer your question?  Stop monster painting people just because you disagree with them.

As for this comment

10 hours ago, LatterDSaint said:

interesting point. Mob rule however will always be a product of a corrupt government....

 

It can be.  Or you can enforce the Rule of Law on the corruption.  Note this. Most of the Military is conservative, same for Law Enforcement, same for the most of the owners of the USA many guns.  And because they are conservative they respect and are held in check by the rule of law..  So how can you rationally and reasonably expect the destruction of the Rule of Law and the encouragement of Mob rule to end well for you and the Democrats/Liberals?  If I were in Democrats/Liberal position I would be very very careful about weaponing a tool for political ends that the either side has more of and more experience with.

[jerome1232]

@LatterDSaint Man, I left the republican party when Trump got the republican nomination. I actually am not a registered republican specifically because I dislike trump *so* much that I felt if he represented the republican party, than I must not be a republican. I don't just dislike him, I can't stand him. I still consider myself a conservative, just more of a Rand Paul type of conservative. Now with that in mind even I think you are being over the top ridiculous with your statements regarding Trump and Kavanaugh (although admittedly I'm not following the Kavanaugh thing, at all). 

[Sunday21]

I wonder what % of members voted for Mr T? When I joined the church, I would often encounter pockets of people in the corridors between classes, one of the most interesting aspects of attending church, ...kinda like this forum! ....sometimes these discussions would be mutual declarations of ‘If the prophet asked, I would instantly sell everything I owned and push a handcart to Utah’. Well guess what? the prophet asked, and -

in a particularly Canadian roundabout way!!!! That Nelson is as Canadian as a beaver tail (fried pastry)🇨🇦

and ....yeah. How many people listened and obeyed? You might think that the prophet’s request might in someway colour member’s views of Mr T’s politics.

Now the prophet might well have been referring to both of the leading candidates. I don’t know enough about US politics to tell. But I was surprised that more US members did not vote for a 3rd party candidate. 

If the Republicans are off the rails and the Democrats are distasteful, how about a 3rd party? Ok, you can’t go out and start your own party but you could vote for 3rd party candidates. 

Edited September 15, 2018 by Sunday21

[LatterDSaint]

2 hours ago, estradling75 said:

the encouragement of Mob rule to end well for you and the Democrats/Liberals?

I haven't encouraged anything of a sort. My point earlier was that in situations where the government is corrupt, its to be expected. And social backlash is not "mob rule" as far as I am aware.

 

2 hours ago, estradling75 said:

Seriously what part of ' not my place to hand out judgment and/or punishment' does not already answer your question?  Stop monster painting people just because you disagree with them.

I specifically said some LDS Republicans might BELIEVE Trump would reach celestial glory. I also specifically said in a text above that obviously it would not be up to me (and obviously not anyone on this earth) to determine where he would end up. But I would have a pretty good idea. I also asked if having this idea is wrong, according to you. I know its a question you don't like so I am not going to shame you for running away from it. I mean who in their right mind would want to say "Even through Trump's personal mistakes he is fighting  for the American people as President, and because of that, I believe that he would reach celestial glory" hahaha. 

Edited September 15, 2018 by LatterDSaint

[Midwest LDS]

21 minutes ago, Sunday21 said:

I wonder what % of members voted for Mr T? When I joined the church, I would often encounter pockets of people in the corridors between classes, one of the most interesting aspects of attending church, ...kinda like this forum! ....sometimes these discussions would be mutual declarations of ‘If the prophet asked, I would instantly sell everything I owned and push a handcart to Utah’. Well guess what? the prophet asked, and -

in a particularly Canadian roundabout way!!!! That Nelson is as Canadian as a beaver tail (fried pastry)🇨🇦

and ....yeah. How many people listened and obeyed? You might think that the prophet’s request might in someway colour member’s views of Mr T’s politics.

Now the prophet might well have been referring to both of the leading candidates. I don’t know enough about US politics to tell. But I was surprised that more US members did not vote for a 3rd party candidate. 

If the Republicans are off the rails and the Democrats are distasteful, how about a 3rd party? Ok, you can’t go out and start your own party but you could vote for 3rd party candidates. 

The problem with voting third party in the United States is, outside of some local elections, they are guranteed to lose. They just don't have enough popular support. In addition, many won't vote for a third party because of the spoiler effect. Here is a link to our good friend wikipedia if you are interested https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spoiler_effect. Suffice it to say though, if you vote for a third party, it actually allows the party most ideologically different from you to win (speaking of group's voting not just as an individual). For example, in 1992 Ross Perot ran a strong 3rd party challenge for president. While he attracted voters from both parties, most of his suport came from more conservative voters, traditionally suoporters of the Republican party here who would have voted for George Bush Sr., and split the vote enough to allow Bill Clinton, the Democrat to win (I'll also point out Ralph Nader who did the same thing to the Democrats in Florida in 2000). All strong third parties do here in the States is let the guy you like the least win if you vote for them. Which is why many times people will "hold their nose" while they are voting for someone they don't like, in this case Trump, to avoid someone they like even less, this time around Clinton.

Edited September 15, 2018 by Midwest LDS

[Sunday21]

@Midwest LDS Thank you this makes sense. 

Edited September 15, 2018 by Sunday21

[Midwest LDS]

Just now, Sunday21 said:

@Midwest LDS Than you this makes sense. 

You're welcome!

[estradling75]

2 minutes ago, LatterDSaint said:

I havent encouraged anything of a sort. And social backlash is not "mob rule" as far as I am aware.

 

Your are encouraging it and it is.  Mob rule is the ultimate social backlash.  When your lesser forms of social backlash do not work (which they are not) the only option left is to escalate the backlash.  Escalated enough it is mob rule

 

5 minutes ago, LatterDSaint said:

I specifically said some LDS Republicans might BELIEVE Trump would reach celestial glory. I also specifically said in a text above that obviously it would not be up to me (and obviously not anyone on this earth) to determine where he would end up. But I would have a pretty good idea. I also asked if having this idea is wrong, according to you. I know its a question you don't like so I am not going to shame you for running away from it. I mean who in their right mind would want to say "Even through Trump's personal mistakes he is fighting  for the American people as President, and because of that, I believe that he would reach celestial glory" hahaha. 

And in-spite of your continued slanderous implication of my character I have answered.  I believe in exercising righteous judgment as outlined and instructed in the scriptures... and summarized  by Elder Oaks here https://www.lds.org/ensign/1999/08/judge-not-and-judging?lang=eng&_r=1

 

2 hours ago, jerome1232 said:

@LatterDSaint Man, I left the republican party when Trump got the republican nomination. I actually am not a registered republican specifically because I dislike trump *so* much that I felt if he represented the republican party, than I must not be a republican. I don't just dislike him, I can't stand him. I still consider myself a conservative, just more of a Rand Paul type of conservative. Now with that in mind even I think you are being over the top ridiculous with your statements regarding Trump and Kavanaugh (although admittedly I'm not following the Kavanaugh thing, at all). 

You are not the only one that did not vote for Trump.  I count four in this thread alone.  You, me,  NeuroTypical and Just_A_Guy.  And we are just the ones that have spoken up so far I am sure there  more.  I am also sure there are many more voters here who looked at Hilary then looked at Trump.  Then decided to hold their nose and vote for Trump.  Inspite of this we get people who because we disagree with them, tell is we are to blinded by our own politics to see the flaws in the man. (a man we did not vote for or voted for reluctantly)  This massive misjudgment  on their part results in their total loss of creditability... they do not recognized it is because of their flawed judgment that they are being countered and discredited.  They are too invested in there own preconceived ideas of what they think and assume we are to see the truth of the matter or even listen to the words we have plainly and repeatedly spoken

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Just_A_Guy]

11 hours ago, LatterDSaint said:

Just curious, is it false judgement on my behalf to believe that unless Trump repents he wont even reach the telestial kingdom of glory? As a member of the LDS Church am I wrong to have this view of Trump considering his immoral character. Of course if he died today, it would not be up to me, but I would have a pretty good idea.... and I fully acknowledge that we are all sinners, but I would have to try REALLY hard to do and say half of what Trump does...

Somehow I get the feeling that some LDS republicans believe Trump would reach the Celestial kingdom of glory just because he was elected president. Not necessarily you, but nonetheless I would like to confirm...

Oh, there are probably *some* Mormons out there who think this way; but anecdotally—they are a minority.  In my Utah County Republican neighborhood caucus during the 2016 primaries, Trump only got four or five votes; out of over 300 cast.  And our neighborhood is so heavily Mormon, that caucus night was basically an extra session of stake conference.  

Also, for the sake of pedantry; I would note that Trump probably doesn’t have enough Gospel knowledge to become a son of perdition.  So I would venture to guess that he qualifies for the Telestial Kingdom at minimum.  

[Sunday21]

I have just been hearing a long list of democratic complaints about democratic leaders and associates.

The Clintons destroyed health care for the poor, favoured the wealthy 

When Michelle Obama was an administrator working with the U of Chicago, she would not allow the poor to have a single break. Not a nickel.

[JohnsonJones]

I'm not a fan of Trump but what I DO see is that if anyone manipulated the election directly it was the UK.  I find it interesting that the UK has not been shown for what THEY did (if anyone, the dossier had origins with their people, JK Rowling has repeatedly tried to influence what Americans think about the election, and various other UK celebrities with a  LOT more weight than that of some ads on Facebook stated a LOT more in regards to swaying US politics than anything I've seen from Russia, UNLESS, of course, they are in LEAGUE with Russia).

Many here would say I'm not a Conservative (by LDS measures), or even close.

In regards to Kavanaugh, I'm not sure WHY this came out last minute, but I DO know the in the US we are normally allowed to see the accuser.  The accuser may want privacy, but with something THIS big being leveled that could affect the US, an anonymous accuser without any witnesses and without any evidence at LEAST at this point in the confirmation process seems VERY SHADY.  Like...made up type shady.  I am not favorable towards the far right, and I fear that if Kavanaugh comes in the court will be totally dominated by the Right without any balance (Kennedy was sort of a balance before), BUT this coming out at this point REEKS of pure imaginary stories to tear him down.  I'd vote for him (I suppose I may have a little anti-authority in me) JUST to spite whoever made the story UP...

BUT...

If it's real, than let him face his accuser (that's still a right, correct)?  Let us all see this accuser that went to an all boy's School (though I believe they say they were a classmate from a nearby High School, but that by definition is NOT actually a classmate).  That way we can verify if they were even in the same town as he was when he was in school and at least know how likely their story is to even be plausible. 

If it's plausible, I think one could wonder (things do happen like this, it's an awfully long time to sit on it though) what happened even with the 65 woman vouching for him (predators can have people vouch for them all the time, a particularly recent case with a low ranking church leader comes to mind who got off almost scotch free compared to what he did comes to mind), BUT, if someone isn't even willing to come forward, and we have no evidence or witnesses, it REALLY seems to me that it is either made up, or probably implausible to have occurred, even more so because it came out so late in the confirmation.

In regards to politics as a whole, thank goodness the LDS church is not congruous with the US Republican Party or I probably would have been excommunicated a LOOONG time ago.  (Right now, I am in good standing in the Church.  I even have a calling.  That means they must not be TOO concerned with my political leanings.  I do not normally talk anything about politics with the ward or in the church building though.  I believe most of my Kids are Republicans though.  Some are probably even far right Republicans.

The church itself normally remains neutral about politics, though there are few exceptions.

[JohnsonJones]

9 hours ago, estradling75 said:

You are not the only one that did not vote for Trump.  I count four in this thread alone.  You, me,  NeuroTypical and Just_A_Guy. 

I would be a fifth that did not vote for Trump.  Things would have to be looking pretty grim to force me to vote for him.  Trump seems pretty evil to me and a "very not nice bad guy" type individual.  He seems pretty sinful.  I do not like the way he disrespects veterans, the disabled, and other groups that are not so fortunate.  He seems to act like a spoiled rich kid, even though he's not a kid anymore (he's actually my generation I believe).

I don't know where he would end up.  I don't know his heart, what he has been taught, or how he is seen in the eyes of the Lord.  Judgment is the Lord's.  We, on the otherhand, should refrain from trying to pass a final judgment.  For all I know I could be the one who ends up in the Telestial Kingdom and he could end up in the Celestial Kingdom in the highest degree.  I do not know.

I hope to at least avoid eternal punishment, and hopefully, even if I end up in the Telestial, will at least go right to the reward rather than suffering for a while in torment.  All we can do is hope for our own salvation and pray that we are righteous enough to reach exaltation.