Liberal Ideas Creeping In


Fether
 Share

Recommended Posts

Guest Godless
3 hours ago, askandanswer said:

I still haven't worked out the difference between making a judgement and forming an opinion. 

In this scenario, I'd say that the opinion is your view of the action and the judgement is your view of the person performing it.

Opinion: Married women shouldn't be in the workforce if they're in a situation that allows them to stay home.

Judgement: Married women who are able to stay home but have careers anyway are doing something wrong.

See the difference? As an atheist, this distinction is important in my dealings with the religious majority. In general, I detest religion,  but not religious people. This doesn't mean that I don't sometimes make judgements about people, we all do. And I find that I tend to be more judgemental when someone's choices or actions clearly have adverse affects on someone else. I don't think women in the workforce falls under that category.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, askandanswer said:

I don't understand those who condemn the making of judgements. 

It's an especially ironic form of virtue signaling. Individuals and groups that levy wholesale condemnation on those who make judgments can safely be ignored in almost all cases. I would probably go further and make the judgment that they can be ignored in all such cases—which they would doubtless condemn. It's like a fun merry-go-round ride, except for the "fun" part.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Godless said:

In this scenario, I'd say that the opinion is your view of the action and the judgement is your view of the person performing it.

Opinion: Married women shouldn't be in the workforce if they're in a situation that allows them to stay home.

Judgement: Married women who are able to stay home but have careers anyway are doing something wrong.

See the difference? As an atheist, this distinction is important in my dealings with the religious majority. In general, I detest religion,  but not religious people. This doesn't mean that I don't sometimes make judgements about people, we all do. And I find that I tend to be more judgemental when someone's choices or actions clearly have adverse affects on someone else. I don't think women in the workforce falls under that category.

Godless, I seem to recall that you used to be a Latter-day Saint while growing up or in early adulthood. Am I misremembering? Because if you did, you continually exhibit a condition common to ex-Latter-day Saints: You are utterly unwilling, or perhaps unable, to recall and honestly describe what being a Latter-day Saint entails and what motivates us.

To wit: The problematic element above is when you claim LDS judgment in this case is that "Married women who are able to stay home but have careers anyway are doing something wrong." This is grossly oversimplified to the point of being outright false. More importantly, it utterly ignores true ideals that motivate beliefs and actions, and frames things in the wholly inappropriate context of godless atheism, using feminist and communist theories of power hierarchies closely associated with Marx/Engels' proletariat uprising ideas.

If this is an honest mistake on your part, then I ask that you please carefully read and consider what I'm writing, so that you don't continue making this particular egregious error in the future.

The Latter-day Saint viewpoint hinges on God being our Father in a sort of hyperliteral sense, more literally than even our own earthy fathers are our fathers. The family is not merely the most important thing we possess; it is the only thing we possess. Of course, we don't possess it in the way we might possess a car or a candy bar or a tract of land. It is literally a stewardship granted us to become, eventually, a divine eternal inheritance. Everything God does for us, either personally or through the agency of his kingdom (which in mortality is currently called The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints), is designed to enhance our ability to further this stewardship. Everything. No exceptions. Qualifying to receive this stewardship as an eternal inheritance is what we Latter-day Saints call "exaltation".

As such, everything we do should—in the end, must—be pointed toward furthering the eternal family. This furtherance can happen only on principles of truth; keeping your felony-committing son out of prison because you "love him so much" is an example of what this sort of effort is not. To this end, we even take upon ourselves what we refer to as the "law of sacrifice", in which we agree basically to sacrifice everything to the cause of eternal exaltation with our families. In other words, there is nothing in this earth—not power, not position, not liberty, not possessions, not health, not even life, whether our own or our children's—that is of comparable value to that exaltation we seek. The glories of the world, considered either individually or even all put together, are as nothing in comparison. As the being we call the Lord Jesus taught in Matthew 16:26, "For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?" The divine promise of ultimate salvation of our soul is not merely personal redemption from our sins, but exaltation with our families.

Given this, what is a man's duty? To serve his family, of course. This enlarges to serving his community, his brothers and sisters, his neighbors, and so forth. What is a woman's duty? Clearly, it is the same.

So if men and women share the same basic duty to God, to each other, and to themselves, why might there be any difference in how the fulfillment of that duty is expressed? The answer becomes obvious when you consider how men and women are different. Why do we even have different words for men and women? Why do we distinguish (aka discriminate) between the sexes? Obviously, it is because the sexes have separate and severable roles to play in creating and nurturing human life. Only a mindless humanist would suggest such idiocy as that men have as much "right" to motherhood as women. The statement makes no sense, whatever our current political stupidity says.

According to LDS doctrine, human sexual dimorphism is both physical and spiritual, and is explicitly designed by God. Thus, men and women have much overlap in their responsibilities, but men have specific areas of overriding concern and women have other specific areas of overriding concern. All areas are of concern to both sexes, and all areas are the responsibility of both sexes (except for sex-specific things like child-bearing and nursing), but there is a clear division of primary responsibility in certain areas.

A woman's primary responsibility outside of her duty to God and to her husband is to bear, nurture, teach, train, and protect their children. A man's primary responsibility outside of his duty to God and to his wife is to protect and provide for their children. It can be reasonably asserted that a man's and a woman's respective duties to their children are an extension of their duties to each other, and in fact even to God.

What happens if a man is unable to perform his duties according to the above description? Then the woman must step up and bear that responsibility as much as she can. Within the kingdom of God, we are expected to help each other in such situations, so that e.g. the widow and her children are cared for. Similarly, if a woman is unable to perform her duties, the husband is expected to step into the role, with the help of sisters and brothers in the kingdom.

But what if a man simply refuses to fulfill his duties? What if he decides he doesn't like the restrictions and wants to dance to his own piper? He is free to do so. But in such a case, he should not expect (or, as is more often the case today, demand) divine approval for his actions. In the same vein, if a woman chooses to abandon or put into second place her divine roles because she's decided she is smarter than God or his patriarchy-establishing prophets, then she is free to do so. But she should not expect God or those in his kingdom to applaud her actions.

Is it true that every time a woman works outside the home, she is abandoning her divine duties? I expect that all of us here would agree that is not the case. So suggesting such a thing is false. But how about when e.g. a woman wants to live in a nicer house or own a nicer vehicle or just experience the wonder and glory of working her way up the career ladder? Is she somehow doing something wrong by putting her children in daycare (or just refusing to bear children at all) while she chases her dreams? Well...yes, of course she is. She is choosing the much lesser part. Does she have the right to make that choice? Sure. Does that mean everyone needs to acknowledge that her choice is just exactly as correct and acceptable as the choice made by women who sacrifice (note the word) worldly ambitions in order to choose the better part by fulfilling their divine roles at home? Not on your life.

We are never required to call evil good. We are never required even to say that a "good" choice is as good as a "better" choice, or that a "better" choice is just as good as a "best" choice.

What you claim as LDS "judgement" is vastly oversimplified, exhibiting not the least little spark of understanding. It's a great argument for the sophist seeking to impose prejudicial rhetoric on an ignorant mob, but is not worthy of one seeking to understand the true ideas and motives of others. If you are so seeking, please reconsider your misstatements.

Edited by Vort
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Godless
45 minutes ago, Vort said:

Godless, I seem to recall that you used to be a Latter-day Saint while growing up or in early adulthood. Am I misremembering? Because if you did, you continually exhibit a condition common to ex-Latter-day Saints: You are utterly unwilling, or perhaps unable, to recall and honestly describe what being a Latter-day Saint entails and what motivates us.

To wit: The problematic element above is when you claim LDS judgment in this case is that "Married women who are able to stay home but have careers anyway are doing something wrong." This is grossly oversimplified to the point of being outright false. More importantly, it utterly ignores true ideals that motivate beliefs and actions, and frames things in the wholly inappropriate context of godless atheism, using feminist and communist theories of power hierarchies closely associated with Marx/Engels' proletariat uprising ideas.

Yes, I was raised LDS. And yes, I'm familiar with the LDS teachings of exaltation and preparing for something greater.

45 minutes ago, Vort said:

But what if a man simply refuses to fulfill his duties? What if he decides he doesn't like the restrictions and wants to dance to his own piper? He is free to do so. But in such a case, he should not expect (or, as is more often the case today, demand) divine approval for his actions. In the same vein, if a woman chooses to abandon or put into second place her divine roles because she's decided she is smarter than God or his patriarchy-establishing prophets, then she is free to do so. But she should not expect God or those in his kingdom to applaud her actions.

Shouldn't such decisions be between the individual and God (and maybe their bishop)? I'm not saying that people who stray from Church teachings and doctrine should get an attaboy and a pat on the back from their fellow saints, but I'd argue that judging someone else's adherence to doctrine is premature at best, and pharisaical at worst. Everyone's journey to exaltation is different. Some of you are doing better than others at living the gospel. Again, I don't think it's necessary to reinforce contrary behaviors or choices. But what standing does the average saint have to judge the spiritual journey of another?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Godless said:

Shouldn't such decisions be between the individual and God (and maybe their bishop)?

You mean exclusively between the individual and God (and maybe bishop)? No, of course not. We must judge people's actions. That is exactly what you are doing; I'm surprised (but not very) that you would pass judgment of right and wrong on Latter-day Saints while insisting that they not pass judgment of right and wrong on others.

3 minutes ago, Godless said:

I'm not saying that people who stray from Church teachings and doctrine should get an attaboy and a pat on the back from their fellow saints, but I'd argue that judging someone else's adherence to doctrine is premature at best, and pharisaical at worst.

It is true that we cannot see into another's heart and are in no position to state what another person's standing is before God. But to take a position such as, "A mother with children at home should generally best be staying at home rearing her children wherever possible, rather than farming them off to a daycare so she can pursue her vocational dreams," is not wrong, nor is it wrong to refuse to concede that Jane Smith's case is different because she's special. That does not mean you're passing judgment on Jane Smith; it means simply that you know right from wrong, at least in your judgment of it, and you're going to stick with your beliefs. No condemnation of another is implicit in holding to one's beliefs.

6 minutes ago, Godless said:

Everyone's journey to exaltation is different.

You're an atheist. Honestly, how would you know the first thing about one's journey to exaltation—a state you deny and explicitly disbelieve even exists? In this case, you are demonstrably wrong. Strait is the gate and narrow the way that leads to eternal life, and few there be that find it.

8 minutes ago, Godless said:

But what standing does the average saint have to judge the spiritual journey of another?

Who is judging another's journey? I think you're making that up, just as you appear to have made up the initial condemnation that I first responded to. If your complaint is about Saints passing judgment, you're blatantly moving the goalposts from complaining about unrighteous judgment to complaining about any judgment—which we have already explicitly pointed out is our duty. Of course we pass judgment on the actions of others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Godless
12 hours ago, Vort said:

You're an atheist. Honestly, how would you know the first thing about one's journey to exaltation—a state you deny and explicitly disbelieve even exists? In this case, you are demonstrably wrong. Strait is the gate and narrow the way that leads to eternal life, and few there be that find it.

Do as an atheist, I'm not allowed to speak in hypotheticals? On the contrary, that's practically all we do when debating the deeper aspects of religion. I'll submit that my understanding of the doctrines don't run nearly as deeply as yours, and I genuinely appreciate your insights. 

Let me clarify my statement. While there may be one rigid path to exaltation, everone's journey to find that path is different. I would compare it to a college degree. The academic requirements to obtsin a degree are the same for everyone. Most people are able to achieve it in four years. Some take longer. Let's say it takes me 20 years to finish my bachelor's degree. I fulfilled the same requirements as those who do it in 4, but my journey was obviously vastly different. Can the same not be true about peoples' spiritual journeys? Given the fallen state of man, is it it really reasonable to expect everyone's path to the light to be perfect and free if worldly distraction?

12 hours ago, Vort said:

Who is judging another's journey? I think you're making that up, just as you appear to have made up the initial condemnation that I first responded to. If your complaint is about Saints passing judgment, you're blatantly moving the goalposts from complaining about unrighteous judgment to complaining about any judgment—which we have already explicitly pointed out is our duty. Of course we pass judgment on the actions of others.

I may have been unclear in my explanation, or misunderstood the stance I was responding to. All I've been trying to say is that judging the actions of others based on your own moral compass is fine.  It crosses a line when you start judging the character of other people based on their actions. Perhaps this is basically what you and others have been saying and I misunderstood. If that's the case, I apologize. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Godless said:

Let me clarify my statement. While there may be one rigid path to exaltation, everone's journey to find that path is different. I would compare it to a college degree. The academic requirements to obtsin a degree are the same for everyone. Most people are able to achieve it in four years. Some take longer. Let's say it takes me 20 years to finish my bachelor's degree. I fulfilled the same requirements as those who do it in 4, but my journey was obviously vastly different. Can the same not be true about peoples' spiritual journeys? Given the fallen state of man, is it it really reasonable to expect everyone's path to the light to be perfect and free if worldly distraction?

To use your college degree example... If a person chooses to take 20 years that is their choice.  But once they get their degree they better not be expecting to be equal to those that that have been working with their degree for 16 years more then them.  Those additional 16 years are gone and not coming back.  And with the idea that a college degree equals exaltation which is literally the most important and best thing we can get.  Then everyone, including the person on that path should be made very much aware that they are on a sub optimal path that they will most likely end up regretting in hindsight.  And if Person A trying to warn Person B that Person B is going to regret the choices they are currently making.. Well that is Person A being a good Christian like they are suppose to be and making sure Person B fully understands the consequences they are choosing.

Sadly we live in a world were Person B is being told that they can choose anything they want and there are no consequences. That they can ignore what is important but somehow still claim all the rewards and be equal to those that sacrificed and put in the work. This is a horribly toxic and deceitful lie .

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Godless said:

I may have been unclear in my explanation, or misunderstood the stance I was responding to. All I've been trying to say is that judging the actions of others based on your own moral compass is fine.  It crosses a line when you start judging the character of other people based on their actions. Perhaps this is basically what you and others have been saying and I misunderstood. If that's the case, I apologize. 

In the context of this conversation, I mostly agree.  I can't see a person's heart.  It's important for me to judge their actions, lest my children or those outside the Church find such behavior to be acceptable.  This was a big issue for me as an investigator, which took quite some time for me to understand.  Doctrine says X, Y, and Z are wrong.  Members A, B, and C follow the rules by all appearances.  Member D openly doesn't follow the rules, talks about not following the rules, and by all appearances thinks it's perfectly OK to not follow the rules.  In fact, he may say those rules are incorrect.  Members A, B, and C seem to completely accept, and not challenge, member D's position.  It was very confusing to me as an outsider to understand what is or isn't doctrine or expected.  I make sure my children, and friends with questions about the Church, understand what is expected and what the Church position is.    I judge those actions, but I sometimes can't tell what their character is.  Are they addicted?  Do they struggle with doctrine?  Do they reject those teachings?   I can't tell, so pass no judgement.

Other times, I have no issue judging character based on their actions.  If you're a rapist,  I feel pretty comfortable judging your character.  (Royal "you", obviously.  I'm not insinuating that you are a rapist)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, estradling75 said:

To use your college degree example... If a person chooses to take 20 years that is their choice.  But once they get their degree they better not be expecting to be equal to those that that have been working with their degree for 16 years more then them.  Those additional 16 years are gone and not coming back.  And with the idea that a college degree equals exaltation which is literally the most important and best thing we can get.  Then everyone, including the person on that path should be made very much aware that they are on a sub optimal path that they will most likely end up regretting in hindsight.  And if Person A trying to warn Person B that Person B is going to regret the choices they are currently making.. Well that is Person A being a good Christian like they are suppose to be and making sure Person B fully understands the consequences they are choosing.

Sadly we live in a world were Person B is being told that they can choose anything they want and there are no consequences. That they can ignore what is important but somehow still claim all the rewards and be equal to those that sacrificed and put in the work. This is a horribly toxic and deceitful lie .

 

Whatever principle of intelligence we attain unto in this life, it will rise with us in the resurrection. And if a person gains more knowledge and intelligence in this life through his diligence and obedience than another, he will have so much the advantage in the world to come. [D&C 130:18–19]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been thinking about this discussion and I also thought of something I've found to be important in matters of judgement. What is my motivation in judging this person? If my goal is to look at someone, as the Pharisee did to the Publican in the Savior's parable, and say to myself thank goodness I'm so much better than him, I'm failing to judge properly. Proper judgement in my experience involves also wanting to help either yourself or someone else do better. Am I explaining to someone why following the Word of Wisdom (for example) is better than not because the spiritual and physical blessings have greatly improved my time here on Earth and following it is the better choice? Than I am on safe ground. Am I snidely commenting to someone next to me that the brother in front of us is obviously a bad member because he smells like cigarette smoke? If I do so than I'm guilty of a greater sin because I'm just trying to make myself look better in comparison. Proper judgement also involves plenty of charity.

Edited by Midwest LDS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Godless said:

So as an atheist, I'm not allowed to speak in hypotheticals? On the contrary, that's practically all we do when debating the deeper aspects of religion.

Sure you're allowed to speak hypothetically. Your phrasing didn't look hypothetical to me; it looked like a flat statement, an observation of fact.

26 minutes ago, Godless said:

I would compare it to a college degree. The academic requirements to obtain a degree are the same for everyone. Most people are able to achieve it in four years. Some take longer. Let's say it takes me 20 years to finish my bachelor's degree. I fulfilled the same requirements as those who do it in 4, but my journey was obviously vastly different. Can the same not be true about peoples' spiritual journeys? Given the fallen state of man, is it it really reasonable to expect everyone's path to the light to be perfect and free if worldly distraction?

These are excellent questions, especially when asked sincerely and not rhetorically. In my view, your comparison is not invalid. It is not the comparison model, but rather its application, to which I object.

People's spiritual journeys are of necessity unique, just as the individual circumstances and the individuals themselves are unique. But saying that a person is unique from all others does not imply that the person is essentially different from all others. Their body chemistry is not utterly unique, for example. The construction of their heart valves is not alien to all others. The neurological symbols by which their brain analyzes and understands the world is not essentially different from other human beings. Their legs do not grow out of the tops of their heads.

People are unique the way snowflakes are unique. We can appreciate the individualized beauty of a snowflake without ever supposing that this particular snowflake, because if its differences, may perhaps survive being warmed to twenty degrees above the melting point of water. It won't, ever. That is not the nature of snowflakes.

Man is bound by the laws of physics. Man is also bound by the laws of spirit, not because God has set up arbitrary bounds that we must toe for no better reason than that God said so, but because they are a description of reality. The laws of spiritual life and growth are not subject to the same kind of blind testing as the laws of physics, but both sets of laws describe reality. We can no more challenge the laws of spiritual growth than an infant suckling at his mother's breast can challenge the laws of Einsteinian mechanics, nor (IMO) do we have any more insight into the deficiencies of the spiritual model we are given than the infant does into the physical model mentioned. Our best course of action in all cases is to learn and follow the spiritual law, not kick against it.

40 minutes ago, Godless said:

All I've been trying to say is that judging the actions of others based on your own moral compass is fine.  It crosses a line when you start judging the character of other people based on their actions. Perhaps this is basically what you and others have been saying and I misunderstood.

I think I agree with your statement above, but I leave some wiggle room because I'm not sure exactly what you mean by "judging the character of other people". You seemed to say that judging Jane Smith's decision to pursue her career as being a bad decision is wrong in all cases, that somehow we as outside entities are incapable of rendering any such judgment in a just manner. This is not judging the character of others, but judging best from not best. The suggestion that we are unable and unjustified in ever judging the decisions or the reasons behind the state of another person is naked nihilism, which I utterly reject.

No one is suggesting that they themselves are perfect. I may well be guilty of judgmentalism; if so, I must repent of that failing. I don't believe I am guilty of that, but I acknowledge the possibility. I have done such evils before, and worse. But if I must walk a line between judgmentalism and nihilism, I prefer to err on the side of being somewhat too ready to judge rather than fall into the paralysis of being unwilling to call a spade a spade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, estradling75 said:

To use your college degree example... If a person chooses to take 20 years that is their choice.  But once they get their degree they better not be expecting to be equal to those that that have been working with their degree for 16 years more then them.  Those additional 16 years are gone and not coming back.  And with the idea that a college degree equals exaltation which is literally the most important and best thing we can get.  Then everyone, including the person on that path should be made very much aware that they are on a sub optimal path that they will most likely end up regretting in hindsight.  And if Person A trying to warn Person B that Person B is going to regret the choices they are currently making.. Well that is Person A being a good Christian like they are suppose to be and making sure Person B fully understands the consequences they are choosing.

The Catholic Church has for many centuries said that priests should remain single
and celibate.  It seems to be leaning in a direction where this prohibition may be lifted.

Do you think the following words of Jesus indicate one can choose to remain single and 
still be pleasing to God?

"... there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s 
sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Godless said:

Do as an atheist, I'm not allowed to speak in hypotheticals? On the contrary, that's practically all we do when debating the deeper aspects of religion. I'll submit that my understanding of the doctrines don't run nearly as deeply as yours, and I genuinely appreciate your insights. 

Let me clarify my statement. While there may be one rigid path to exaltation, everone's journey to find that path is different. I would compare it to a college degree. The academic requirements to obtsin a degree are the same for everyone. Most people are able to achieve it in four years. Some take longer. Let's say it takes me 20 years to finish my bachelor's degree. I fulfilled the same requirements as those who do it in 4, but my journey was obviously vastly different. Can the same not be true about peoples' spiritual journeys? Given the fallen state of man, is it it really reasonable to expect everyone's path to the light to be perfect and free if worldly distraction?

I may have been unclear in my explanation, or misunderstood the stance I was responding to. All I've been trying to say is that judging the actions of others based on your own moral compass is fine.  It crosses a line when you start judging the character of other people based on their actions. Perhaps this is basically what you and others have been saying and I misunderstood. If that's the case, I apologize. 

May I first say that I think that your thinking is flawed - especial about college degrees.  My life experience is that if one is to take 10 individuals at random in any profession (doctor, lawyer, teacher, professor, carpenter, mechanic, electrician, engineer, basketball player, musician or whatever --- you will get individuals whose abilities are vastly different.  In short the best of the 10 will be greatly superior the the worst of the 10.  Even when they have the same college degree from the same college.

It appears to me that everyone wants to be judged as an individual - that what makes them different is important to them.  That seldom does anyone want to be compartmentalized as the same as everybody else.  Everybody's journey is important and also different and sometimes the differences can be as important at the journey.  

It is interesting that no one wants to be judged as the same as others but then will object to being judged as different.  Seldom have I encountered a poor performer that thinks that they are the poor performer.  Usually, people think that they are the above average performer.   And then when faced directly with their poor performances; make the excuse that they had more important issues they were dealing with. 

A little story as an example.  I built a deck around a tramp we have in our yard this summer.  The tramp is an octagon and created very difficult angles for the deck - plus the lumber used for the framing was not perfect.  Often things did not line up.  Several times I was willing to let something be what is was but my wife wanted perfection.  Many times she would say that she knew I could do a particular thing better.  I ended up taking apart those imperfections and doing it over again.  In reality I spent more time correcting mistakes than I did the overall building.  But, the now completed deck, is flawless despite all the individual angles that did not line up because of imperfect building materials - especially against the back wall that runs along the property line that is skew to everything else.  (I had to rip three 20 foot Trek decking boards by hand at an angle that was not straight)

I am convinced that those that go through life with nothing but themselves to guide them end up with something inferior to those that are guided by experts that have gone on before adding to the experts before them - but the poor performers will never admit it to anyone else - and often not even themselves.  It is almost always the poorest performers that most object to being judged.

 

The Traveler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share