Have we decided to live the lesser law?


Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Anddenex said:

If I would have known this was simply "a choice" my life and mental state, anxiety, stress, etc... could have been so much better. This to me is more a kick in the jewels and then a knee to the face. Why did I make these decisions if it really doesn't matter? But it has to matter doesn't it.

It matters.  We did similar.  Our decisions / efforts / hardships / trials have made us strong and wise.  Our testimonies are based upon the core gospel of Jesus Christ which requires sacrifice and accountability.  Our testimonies are not based upon current church policy, acceptance, the winds of current social justice idealism, or unconditional love.

I remember when I was a missionary branch president and I had to call a relief society president.  I did some research about the women in the ward and then prayed about it.  The first 5 women that I extend the call either flat out refused or informed me that they were currently disfellowshipped.  I eventually set apart the 6th woman that I extended the calling, and at that point, I had stopped praying about the decision.

I hope that this is what has happened with some of the recent callings.  But with 16M members in the church, you’d think we could do better.

But then again, look at the options that we currently have for leader of the free world.

God help us.

 

Edited by mikbone
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Anddenex said:

Thanks for your additional positive thought JAG. This hits a little harder for me due to choices my wife and I made while we were newly weds to obey. As a result, while going through school I was working a full-time swing and a part-time graveyard to keep my wife home as a primary nurturer and caregiver. This all while taking 12 -17 credits at BYU.

This resulted in me also for a year working a full-time graveyard and full-time morning job due to difficulties that came upon us. This was all to obey and not to sacrifice.

If I would have known this was simply "a choice" my life and mental state, anxiety, stress, etc... could have been so much better. This to me is more a kick in the jewels and then a knee to the face. Why did I make these decisions if it really doesn't matter? But it has to matter doesn't it.

In saying that, I agree with your last paragraph. A hard decision will be when to have kids for our young members.

Why does you think that you and your wife willingness to sacrifice to obey does not matter? Everything I have read in the scriptures tells me it matters.... sometimes even more then the results we get.

You and your wife sacrifice and willingness to obey brought and will bring you happiness and joy... Don't let that be ruined by the Natural man engaging in the sin of comparison.  Don't look at the 11th hour Labors and complain that they the same pay for "Less" work.  Because the judgement that it is less work or easier work is an unrighteous judgement.  They have to be willing to put their all on the altar for God just like you and your wife have have to.  Just because it looks different does not make it lesser.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pres Nelson's wife was the breadwinner for a number of years while he was in school. He openly says as much. But they also didn't put off for many years having kids, as evidenced by his large family. I think we can support the Church's policy on families without assuming the worst of those whose situation does not perfectly match our interpretation of that policy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Harrison Butker actually did a better job articulating/clarifying the work/motherhood idea. He basically said that no achievement outside of the home will measure up to the fulfillment of being a mother, without saying that being a working mother is bad. I think we believe the same thing, but for some reason, lately, our leaders haven't been so plainly spoken, leaving the impression that they can be equally fulfilling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, estradling75 said:

Why does you think that you and your wife willingness to sacrifice to obey does not matter? Everything I have read in the scriptures tells me it matters.... sometimes even more then the results we get.

You and your wife sacrifice and willingness to obey brought and will bring you happiness and joy... Don't let that be ruined by the Natural man engaging in the sin of comparison.  Don't look at the 11th hour Labors and complain that they the same pay for "Less" work.  Because the judgement that it is less work or easier work is an unrighteous judgement.  They have to be willing to put their all on the altar for God just like you and your wife have have to.  Just because it looks different does not make it lesser.

Perception. When we think of leadership, at the general authority level, we are thinking of individuals who are "examples" of Christlike living. Lives we should be emulating. It's why I read the biographies of every president of the Church. Lives worth emulating.

My previous comment, "Why did I make these decisions if it really doesn't matter? But it has to matter doesn't it," is the question that arises when a general authorities decisions isn't worth emulating. Saul lost the kingdom, and as a result his son's paid the price also, because he sacrificed rather than obeyed.

Thank you for your response, I understand what you are seeking to say. I agree, obedience does matter. At least that is what I feel; however, with how my life has had ups and downs, many of those downs would have been avoided if I "sacrificed" rather than obeyed. So, it does cause one to consider, did it matter, but inwardly -- at the core -- as @mikbone shared -- it does matter.

Just for jest... She actually has been in the labor longer than me. She isn't coming to labor after me. ;)

Her work isn't less, it would be similar to us both working in the field, the labor, and we were commanded not to use a specific tool. I obey, and she sacrifices and ends up using that tool (more financial freedom) and the tool we were supposed to use. In the end, because of the additional work done/accomplished (due to sacrificing obedience), she is lifted up as an example. This is just one of the simple ironies in the Church I don't yet fully comprehend. And I all the more realize the Lord's way are not may ways, and his thoughts are higher than my thoughts.

Side note, one of the ironies I find humorous and frustrating is about Patriarchal Blessings and interpretation. We are informed only the individual who received the PB can interpret their PB -- no one else. YET! At BYU in the seminary program the Seminary teacher teaching (who has been studying the gospel as his vocation) will tell the students, "Even if you PB say you will work for the Church," it doesn't mean a seminary teacher. The irony doesn't pass me. Those who study gospel for a living, who know who can interpret a PB, give their own interpretation of the meaning of a person's PB. Just one of those ironies that puzzle me.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Anddenex said:

Lives we should be emulating.

Why? The only life I think I should be emulating is Christ's. Not the original, ancient prophets or apostles, not people in scripture, not modern day leaders. Christ. All the others are fallible. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, zil2 said:

Why? The only life I think I should be emulating is Christ's. Not the original, ancient prophets or apostles, not people in scripture, not modern day leaders. Christ. All the others are fallible. 

Well...

1 Corinthians 11:1

"Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ." (KJV)

"Imitate me, as I also imitate Christ." (CSB)

*We are counseled to take the lives of the faithful that have gone before and use their lives as models for Christian living. *


Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ZealoulyStriving said:

Well...

1 Corinthians 11:1

"Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ." (KJV)

"Imitate me, as I also imitate Christ." (CSB)

*We are counseled to take the lives of the faithful that have gone before and use their lives as models for Christian living. *

Shall I take up skiing, then?  Go to med school and law school?  Get a job or quit my job because of what a leader of the Church does?  Shall I make tents, persecute saints, and traipse up and down Damascus Road hoping for a vision?

It is one thing to heed the counsel of prophets and apostles.  It is one thing to follow the guidance and counsel of the general authorities and officers of the Church.  It is quite another to try to mimic their personal lives and choices, or to allow their personal-life choices to cause me to feel guilt or anything else about my own choices as regards my covenants and understanding of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

As far as I'm concerned, Christ trumps Paul every time:

Quote

2 Nephi 27:27 And know ye that ye shall be judges of this people, according to the judgment which I shall give unto you, which shall be just. Therefore, what manner of men ought ye to be? Verily I say unto you, even as I am.

Jesus Christ, Exemplar (and plenty more not included in this TG entry)

Quote

D&C 76:98 And the glory of the telestial is one,...;

99 For these are they who are of Paul, and of Apollos, and of Cephas.

100 These are they who say they are some of one and some of another—some of Christ and some of John, and some of Moses, and some of Elias, and some of Esaias, and some of Isaiah, and some of Enoch;

101 But received not the gospel, neither the testimony of Jesus, neither the prophets, neither the everlasting covenant.

Find me where the Lord said I should follow Paul rather than Christ.  And no, this doesn't count:

Quote

D&C 1:38 What I the Lord have spoken, I have spoken, and I excuse not myself; and though the heavens and the earth pass away, my word shall not pass away, but shall all be fulfilled, whether by mine own voice or by the voice of my servants, it is the same.

This is not telling me to follow Paul, it's telling me to follow the Lord's teachings given through Paul.  There is a difference.  Maybe the Corinthian saints, who didn't have the scriptures and tons more in the palm of their hands, needed to follow Paul's example (as well as his teaching), because he was there with them, but that does not mean that I should pattern my life after President Johnson, President Nelson, or any other authority of the Church.  Heed their teachings? Yes.  Follow their example? Only if they're demonstrating following Christ (which means really, I'm following Christ).  But worry about their personal life choices (like P. Johnson choosing to work and be a mother at the same time) or let those life choices dictate how I keep or feel about keeping my covenants?  No.

Christ gets to worry about President Johnson's choices.  I get to worry about trying my very best to follow Christ.

Edited by zil2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, zil2 said:

Why? The only life I think I should be emulating is Christ's. Not the original, ancient prophets or apostles, not people in scripture, not modern day leaders. Christ. All the others are fallible. 

Ah, here we are dealing with two sides of a simple coin. In our scriptures, we can see both sides of the coin being taught. The side you are speaking of is as follows, "Therefore, what manner of men ought ye to be? Verily I say unto you, even as I am." No one here, including myself, is arguing against this position.

The other side of the coin is also in the same book of scripture, "Behold, my sons, I desire that ye should remember to keep the commandments of God; and I would that ye should declare unto the people these words. Behold, I have given unto you the names of our first parents who came out of the land of Jerusalem; and this I have done that when you remember your names ye may remember them; and when ye remember them ye may remember their works; and when ye remember their works ye may know how that it is said, and also written, that they were good. Therefore, my sons, I would that ye should do that which is good, that it may be said of you, and also written, even as it has been said and written of them."

Here we have a father telling his kids to look to "fallible" people who loved God, and to follow the works they chose and to make the same decisions so that it could be said of you the same. All of these Book of Mormon prophets were individuals, disciples of Christ, whose choices and actions were worthy of emulation.

President Monson shared this side of the coin also with the following, "My brethren, I reiterate that, as holders of the priesthood of God, it is our duty to live our lives in such a way that we may be examples of righteousness for others to follow." If we are living lives for others to follow, then we are living lives worthy of emulation.

And another verse of scripture that is worthy of emulation is that of Captain Moroni, "Yea, verily, verily I say unto you, if all men had been, and were, and ever would be, like unto Moroni, behold, the very powers of hell would have been shaken forever; yea, the devil would never have power over the hearts of the children of men." (emphasis mine)

A fallible man who the Lord said if all men had been like unto him (a life worthy of emulation), the very powers of hell would have been shaken.

There are two sides to this coin. Of course we want to be like Christ, and Christ has given us "fallible" men/women to be like unto so that we may be like unto Christ. If a person's life isn't worthy of emulation (and are a leader) it will be harder on faithful believers who have sacrificed to follow counsel from someone who sacrificed the counsel for their benefit. It just a factual aspect of life.

And this is why the other side of the coin is most important, we remember who we are actually emulating and that is Christ, and if he is our foundation then we will continue moving forward. Because we recognize the otherside of the coin is simply to bring us to the same conclusion -- follow Christ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Anddenex said:

Ah, here we are dealing with two sides of a simple coin. In our scriptures, we can see both sides of the coin being taught. The side you are speaking of is as follows, "Therefore, what manner of men ought ye to be? Verily I say unto you, even as I am." No one here, including myself, is arguing against this position.

The other side of the coin is also in the same book of scripture, "Behold, my sons, I desire that ye should remember to keep the commandments of God; and I would that ye should declare unto the people these words. Behold, I have given unto you the names of our first parents who came out of the land of Jerusalem; and this I have done that when you remember your names ye may remember them; and when ye remember them ye may remember their works; and when ye remember their works ye may know how that it is said, and also written, that they were good. Therefore, my sons, I would that ye should do that which is good, that it may be said of you, and also written, even as it has been said and written of them."

Here we have a father telling his kids to look to "fallible" people who loved God, and to follow the works they chose and to make the same decisions so that it could be said of you the same. All of these Book of Mormon prophets were individuals, disciples of Christ, whose choices and actions were worthy of emulation.

President Monson shared this side of the coin also with the following, "My brethren, I reiterate that, as holders of the priesthood of God, it is our duty to live our lives in such a way that we may be examples of righteousness for others to follow." If we are living lives for others to follow, then we are living lives worthy of emulation.

And another verse of scripture that is worthy of emulation is that of Captain Moroni, "Yea, verily, verily I say unto you, if all men had been, and were, and ever would be, like unto Moroni, behold, the very powers of hell would have been shaken forever; yea, the devil would never have power over the hearts of the children of men." (emphasis mine)

A fallible man who the Lord said if all men had been like unto him (a life worthy of emulation), the very powers of hell would have been shaken.

There are two sides to this coin. Of course we want to be like Christ, and Christ has given us "fallible" men/women to be like unto so that we may be like unto Christ. If a person's life isn't worthy of emulation (and are a leader) it will be harder on faithful believers who have sacrificed to follow counsel from someone who sacrificed the counsel for their benefit. It just a factual aspect of life.

And this is why the other side of the coin is most important, we remember who we are actually emulating and that is Christ, and if he is our foundation then we will continue moving forward. Because we recognize the otherside of the coin is simply to bring us to the same conclusion -- follow Christ.

So look at her example and if you find Christ there, emulate it.  If you find it bad, don't emulate it.  If you aren't sure whether it's good or bad, disregard it and look to Christ.  Sorry, but I don't see the issue.  Your obedience isn't invalidated by President Johnson's choices.  It can only be invalidated by your own choices.  Sorry, I'm backing back out of this thread - forgot I was staying out of it - I find this entire hoopla bizarre beyond reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/4/2024 at 6:54 PM, mikbone said:

I live in CA so it’s hopefully a local issue, but keeping up with the Jones’s is alive and well here - including the LDS church.

 Don't worry, it's not hard to keep up with my family, not sure why people want to...most have surpassed us, so...no worries there!

On 5/6/2024 at 6:57 AM, Carborendum said:

AMEN, brother.

My son only took a couple of classes at the local JC to explore what various professions were about.  Eventually he got some online training for $35 to become a drafter.  He did have the advantage of having access to the software through me.  But anyone else could have rented it for about $50/month.

He began his career before he even turned 20 years old.  He was making the average salary when he still lived under our roof.

Your son is a Draftsman???

That's phenomenal.  Is Texas behind the rest of the Nation in Engineering disciplines and such?

Most firms that have been hiring around us have gotten rid of draftsmen these days.  With the programs they are using and the things that they are utilizing, the need for draftsmen seems to have fallen off a cliff.  We no longer even offer such programs at our university the demand is so low, and helping those who were trained in it seems to be better suited to cross training them to a different field then having them persist as such.

Kudos to your son, but I know in many areas that's a very limited career field these days. 

Even when it was still somewhat being useful over a decade ago, the average pay wasn't more than $15-$20 an hour for what we were seeing in the experienced draftsmen as the computer programs and other items were already hitting that field rather hard. 

It hit a couple of the men in our stake rather hard as well and over the past decade most have stopped being draftsmen and moved to connected fields.  When I was serving in leadership it was particularly dire for two families were invested with, as they lost their jobs and were have a tough time finding new ones. 

It must be vastly different in Texas it sounds like.

10 hours ago, zil2 said:

So look at her example and if you find Christ there, emulate it.  If you find it bad, don't emulate it.  If you aren't sure whether it's good or bad, disregard it and look to Christ.  Sorry, but I don't see the issue.  Your obedience isn't invalidated by President Johnson's choices.  It can only be invalidated by your own choices.  Sorry, I'm backing back out of this thread - forgot I was staying out of it - I find this entire hoopla bizarre beyond reason.

I'm not really replying to your post, but using it as a jumping off point to respond to the thread's topic.

I am conflicted to some degree about the topic.  I believe mothers should raise their children.  I believe that the lack of mother's in the home have led to a LOT of our societal decay in the West and the failure of morality in our young people (95+% will have marital relation before they are actually married for example).  We see more and more of the younger people simply not having the morals we would think were basic decencies in our day.

I am also a hypocrite.  Let me explain.  I had an incredibly brilliant daughter.  IQ tested over 160.  Extremely intelligent girl.  She literally was the most brilliant child in the area, and the opportunities for her were endless.  I encouraged her to pursue education.  I knew she could be highly successful if she put her mind to it, but when I talk success, I wasn't thinking of her as a home maker, but in the working world. 

And, I was right.  She WAS brilliant.  She was absolutely a wonder to behold.  Then she had children and tried to be a SAHM.  She was absolutely miserable.  Terribly miserable.  Miserable to the point that there was concern for her mental health in a very serious manner.  The best cure was for her to be with someone close to her peer, and that wasn't with the other SAHM generally.  She went back to work and she LOVED it.  She LOVED being at the job. 

I love my daughter.  I want the best for her.  I do not have all the answers.  All I know is that as she tried to be a SAHM it was a terrible thing for her personally.  I can see with her kids how it has affected them.  There are some that have a hard time with the Church.  It probably would have been better if they had a mother that was always home for them, but I don't think that was possible, at least not if we wanted my daughter to still be alive today. 

I don't have the answers.  I can't say that I did the best thing with my kids.  Perhaps it's my fault for encouraging my daughter when she was younger to pursue life and what she could do with it.  I don't know, but I know that the Lord loves her and her children just as much as anyone else. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JohnsonJones said:

That's phenomenal.  Is Texas behind the rest of the Nation in Engineering disciplines and such?

I don't know who might have told you that.  But the drafting profession is alive and well. And I've worked in 7 states (including Utah).

Engineers and architects are being shoved into a box where they don't do any drafting at all.  We use engineering modeling software that may look like CAD to the uninitiated.  But CAD is a different animal.

I was lucky in that I was in the transition phase where I learned three CAD programs in my engineering curriculum (BYU).  When I got my first job, I found out that many engineering schools didn't teach any drafting at all.  And if they did, most engineers didn't remember a thing from their classes.

Today, there is a hard line between engineering and drafting.  The more experienced drafters are taking the place of a lot of engineering work as well as a lot of architectural work.

It is so completely separated that, a few offices ago, I had to have special permission to get CAD on my computer at all.  The head of IT knew me and my background. The department head also knew my history (that's why he hired me) and he had to approve it.  But the IT head had to talk to the technician who was putting my laptop together to ensure that I had CAD on my computer.  It was so abnormal that the technician initially refused.  It took some coaxing by the IT head to get the software loaded.

Too many engineers were so incompetent with CAD that it was a greater danger that they mess up the file than produce any benefit from it.

My current company allows engineers to have CAD by request.  We only need to ask for it. It is so rare that, out of about 60 engineers in my department alone, I'm the only engineer with CAD on the computer. 

Additionally, there is a specialized design package that my son knows backwards and forwards.  Of the 100 or so drafters I've known personally, only two others know it as well as he does.  A couple of others knew a similar software under a different brand.

Of all the others, I thought some of them were competent with the software.  But one of those guys I knew (who is as old as I am) is now working with my son.  My son looked at his files and was not impressed.  He said it was like he had this huge toolbox with every tool imaginable.  But he was doing all the work with a screwdriver and a hammer.  And he may use the claw on the hammer as a screwdriver sometimes.  My son produces 5 or 6 drawings a day.  This other more experienced drafter produces 1 /day.

As for engineers knowing that design package?  Forget it.  I'm the only one I know who uses it at all.  And my knowledge is very poor.   I know a lot of the tools, although I'm not practiced in it.  So, I spend a lot of time going through all the menus to find a particular command.  A trained drafter knows where all of them are.  But apparently, some are better at it than others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

I don't know who might have told you that.  But the drafting profession is alive and well. And I've worked in 7 states (including Utah).

Engineers and architects are being shoved into a box where they don't do any drafting at all.  We use engineering modeling software that may look like CAD to the uninitiated.  But CAD is a different animal.

I was lucky in that I was in the transition phase where I learned three CAD programs in my engineering curriculum (BYU).  When I got my first job, I found out that many engineering schools didn't teach any drafting at all.  And if they did, most engineers didn't remember a thing from their classes.

 

The Engineering department and what happened to the Draftsmen in our stake.

As I said, it may be different in Texas (actually, must be from what you stated).

The very AutoCad with BIM and Revit are what drove the draftsmen out and the computer techs in.

Also, very weird that Texas schools aren't teaching CAD.  It's required along with other courses for Civil and Mechanical. 

Is your son working for you or something as well (that seems to be what you implied)?

Of course, if you are a general engineer or electrical or some other field (computer, bio, etc) you are not required to have it, but for those in the Civil and Mechanical (and probably structural and environmental) fields it's taught quite regularly. 

MIT, Rose-Hulman, and all the other Engineering schools have CAD and other courses in their syllabus and on campus (normally a 500 level from what I've seen) and many times multiple courses in it which also build on each other.

It's very odd that you are stating that schools aren't teaching their engineers this when I KNOW the top schools in the nation that I've visited and looked at DO teach these courses (and most also now cover other things as well such as the aforementioned Revit and BIM stuff).

(Edit:  In legal situations questions such as things do come up as well and are pertinent in some accidents and in regards to the processes that led up to them).

PS: Perhaps there is some disconnect between the schools I am aware of and know of and their departments and what is going on in Texas or the schools your company hires from?

There may be schools which do not have any Engineering Computer literacy courses, though with how our school and others seem to work, it looks as if Engineering (not the electrical or bios, but the more dirt and mechanical ones) is almost ALL done on computers with how they teach it these days with various programs that students work with.  It could be your work is hiring from those schools instead which have no training it these things...which would be odd and put them at a distinct disadvantage compared to others...but hey, could be happening.

I imagine in that scenario draftsmen could be still needed, but draftsmen in general have been a declining profession for some years now elsewhere and many engineering companies no longer use them.

 

PPS: Also, for those who don't use their engineers, many are outsourcing these days as it is cheaper.  In that light, if you don't use engineers for BIM, Solidworks, Pro-E, Revit, BIM and don't outsource but hire Americans instead...Kudos to you.

Edited by JohnsonJones
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, JohnsonJones said:

As I said, it may be different in Texas (actually, must be from what you stated).

And as I stated, I've worked in 7 states as a central office.  And I've worked for weeks or months in several other states.  So, no.  It is not Texas.

51 minutes ago, JohnsonJones said:

The very AutoCad with BIM and Revit are what drove the draftsmen out and the computer techs in.

BIM and Revit are not CAD.  They are building modeling software that have specialized purposes that are mostly engineering/architectural.  But we have both engineers and more advanced CAD techs who run that software.  And they are specialized.

In more residential/commercial fields, we'll see fewer drafters because they have lower budgets and lower salaries.  We usually see one-man-shops who do it all.  But if you have a big firm doing big projects with big budgets, division of labor makes it more efficient to have drafters who are separate from the engineers.

My independent work is like that.  And I can get away with it because I know CAD.  Otherwise I'm working in heavy industry and government work.  There is always division of labor in these fields.

51 minutes ago, JohnsonJones said:

Also, very weird that Texas schools aren't teaching CAD.  It's required along with other courses for Civil and Mechanical. 

As I said, I got my degree at BYU, not Texas.  And we did teach CAD there when I attended.  But I had actually learned drafting before I ever went to college.  So, that may be why I remember more than others.  I know many who graduated with me who got an A in the class.  But a couple years later, they had not done any CAD work, and couldn't use it if they tried.

51 minutes ago, JohnsonJones said:

Is your son working for you or something as well (that seems to be what you implied)?

Nope.  He now works at a company which I left.  I was trying to get him to work for me when I was independent.  But schedules did not align.  By the time he was free enough to help me, I took another job that forbade moonlighting.

51 minutes ago, JohnsonJones said:

Of course, if you are a general engineer or electrical or some other field (computer, bio, etc) you are not required to have it, but for those in the Civil and Mechanical (and probably structural and environmental) fields it's taught quite regularly. 

I work in several different fields.  And there has always been a dividing line between CAD work and Design work.  Design can be done by either experienced drafters or by engineers.  CAD work is usually done by drafters.

51 minutes ago, JohnsonJones said:

MIT, Rose-Hulman, and all the other Engineering schools have CAD and other courses in their syllabus and on campus (normally a 500 level from what I've seen) and many times multiple courses in it which also build on each other.

500 level is graduate level.  Most engineers only have a Bachelor's degree.

51 minutes ago, JohnsonJones said:

It's very odd that you are stating that schools aren't teaching their engineers this when I KNOW the top schools in the nation.

And I KNOW the engineers coming out of them from virtually every state in the country.  And I KNOW that they can't differentiate a line from a polyline or an arc from a spline.

Heck, most engineers don't know the difference between plastic and elastic material behavior and how to calculate capacities using both methods.

51 minutes ago, JohnsonJones said:

almost ALL done on computers with how they teach it these days with various programs that students work with. 

Again, I don't believe you are familiar enough with the profession to understand the difference between engineering modeling software vs drafting software.  And that may be obscuring your assessment of what people do and don't know.

51 minutes ago, JohnsonJones said:

I imagine in that scenario draftsmen could be still needed, but draftsmen in general have been a declining profession for some years now elsewhere and many engineering companies no longer use them.

In some fields, that is true.  That is because there really is no "pure drafting" in those fields.  It is ALL design work.

But in the heavy industry and government sectors, drafting is clearly a very strong field that most engineers don't touch.

51 minutes ago, JohnsonJones said:

PPS: Also, for those who don't use their engineers, many are outsourcing these days as it is cheaper.

I know.  And it is destroying the profession.

Most of the work I've had to review from India has been messed up.  They don't know the codes.  They misapply the equations, and use the wrong sections of the code for the particular design elements they are working on.

Their "pure math" is usually fine.  But their understanding the concepts and ability to read the code is sorely lacking.  I've spent more time correcting and re-correcting their work than it would have taken for me to do the work myself three times over.

But, oh-yeah, it's "cheaper".  Riiiiggghht.

Edited by Carborendum
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back to the topic:

I'd like to tell you the story of my wife's grandmother.  She's in her late 90s.  So, that puts her birth about 20 years after Susan B. Anthony died.  And she fit right in with modern feminists today.  But she had some noticeable differences.

She married in the temple.  She raised 5 children.  Remained married to the same man until his death a few years ago.  She had a career spanning several decades and was also an involved mother.  She had many awards that came from her profession.  So, she was fairly well accomplished.  And all of her children are still members of the Church and actively attend. 

Unfortunately, the results don't end there.  Of her grandchildren only three remain active outside of my wife's branch.

For Grandma's other children: Their only son got divorced twice and is now single with no active children.  One daughter divorced and remarried with only two children still active.  The other daughters married outside the faith and have children who were either never baptized or all left the Church except one.

Of my wife's branch, all but one are active and very strong members of the Church.

Years ago, we were at a family reunion celebrating their 70th anniversary.  And at a point where we were all mingling, Grandma said, "If I had it to do all over again, I never would have had any children."  This was a matter-of-fact statement in front of all her children, spoken as casually as if she were talking about the weather.

Fast forward.  After her husband died.  She came home to an empty house.  And after many days, she began wondering why her children never come to visit her.

The stories of her motherhood are sketchy.  I hear some good tales, some bad.  Some stories where she sacrificed.  Others where she neglected.  So, I don't know her whole story.

What I can say is that after an entire lifetime of condemning the Church and its policy on women and the priesthood and roles of mothers, how much were the children (much less the grandchildren) inspired to believe in such a belief system?

The grandfather was pretty much the model father.  All the children agree on that point.  He did things like teach my wife how to make stained-glass windows.  That sounds like a "crafts" project that a mother or grandmother would teach.  But this man saw it as a hobby that a man does in his shop.  He created memories with his children and grandchildren.  Grandma made memories of her going to work and teaching all the daughters to be working mothers and the son to be a weakling.

At another family reunion, Grandma made a comment about how large her posterity was.  The funny thing about that...

Most of the other branches of the family had working mothers.  But not my MIL.  Of all the grandchildren, most of those with working moms lost their children in the gospel.  I believe that all the other active cousins and spouses are fewer than those from my wife's branch.  And when considering great-grandchildren, it's not even comparable.

While it is possible to be a successful working mother while prioritizing family, there is always something that is lost.  One generation was able to do it with minimal disfunction.  The second generation paid the price for trying to imitate it.  I hope that Pres. Johnson is able to prevent that from happening.

Edited by Carborendum
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/20/2024 at 8:01 AM, Carborendum said:

While it is possible to be a successful working mother while prioritizing family...

What exactly does this look like? Most working mothers end up relying heavily on others to help them with kids when their work must take priority . . . because that's how jobs work. In reality of day to day, the job comes first. So, I am curious what people mean by working and being mom, but mom takes priority. Is it like "quality time over quantity time"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Comp said:

What exactly does this look like? Most working mothers end up relying heavily on others to help them with kids when their work must take priority . . . because that's how jobs work. In reality of day to day, the job comes first. So, I am curious what people mean by working and being mom, but mom takes priority. Is it like "quality time over quantity time"?

The sad truth is that most of the time, it means being a career woman and neglecting the kids.

For those few who are able to make it work while still prioritizing family, it is situationally dependent.  Too many variables to cite for all.  I can give you one example from personal friends.  But that would certainly not be representative of anyone other than the example I have in mind.

One example that I've read about recently had a pair of sisters who worked opposing shifts so they could take care of each other's children in the off hours.

Some mothers have children in school and work during school hours only.  So, they are letting the school system indoctrinate them with pop-culture ideology (often infecting them with the woke mind virus).

Others have part-time jobs that may or may not be home-based.  And they have minimal impact on mom's time with the kids.  She's able to make it work.

As for Pres. Johnson's case, she described it as a "juggle" that was challenging and often stressful.  But she was able to do it.  No details available.  No examples.  But from what little we know about her and her family, apparently, she was successful.

I say "apparently" because (as per my example previously posted) sometimes the effects aren't visible for another generation or two.

Edited by Carborendum
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/18/2024 at 10:08 PM, Anddenex said:

Thanks for your additional positive thought JAG. This hits a little harder for me due to choices my wife and I made while we were newly weds to obey. As a result, while going through school I was working a full-time swing and a part-time graveyard to keep my wife home as a primary nurturer and caregiver. This all while taking 12 -17 credits at BYU.

This resulted in me also for a year working a full-time graveyard and full-time morning job due to difficulties that came upon us. This was all to obey and not to sacrifice.

If I would have known this was simply "a choice" my life and mental state, anxiety, stress, etc... could have been so much better. This to me is more a kick in the jewels and then a knee to the face. Why did I make these decisions if it really doesn't matter? But it has to matter doesn't it.

In saying that, I agree with your last paragraph. A hard decision will be when to have kids for our young members.

Wow!  That sounds like my days in college as well.  But I hadn't gotten married until my final year.  And we didn't have our first child for another two years after leaving school. 

My wife worked outside the home until a few months before delivery.  Ever since then she has been a SAHM.  Only a couple of years ago, she got a job at our children's school to be able to spend time with them during the day.

As for your sacrifices, I hope you had the time to see my post about my wife's grandmother.  It may seem like everything is ok for a while.  But at some point, the chickens come home to roost.  The Lord knows the end from the beginning.  And while obeying will be very difficult at times, we'll eventually see the wisdom in it.

I promise you that the sacrifices you made will bring you blessings that you would not have had if you had done things differently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Carborendum said:

The sad truth is that most of the time, it means being a career woman and neglecting the kids.

I think “neglect” is a harsh word. I know many working moms who walk the line just fine, and their kids turned out a-okay. 

Edited by LDSGator
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/19/2024 at 10:56 AM, Anddenex said:

Saul lost the kingdom, and as a result his son's paid the price also, because he sacrificed rather than obeyed.

This is a more insightful comparison than you might realize.

The Samuel principle is what is driving this.  The Lord made it clear what the "ideal model" of the family should look like.  Yes, there are exceptions that we all acknowledge.  Sometimes things are out of our control.  But where we can obey, we need to obey.

But instead of being sorry that we HAD to move away from the standard that the Lord has set, too many are trying to find excuses/loopholes to justify deviation from the ideal.  Just as the Israelites demanded to abandon the system that the Lord set up, they wanted to be like other nations.  And that led to the destruction of the nation.

When the Lord said that there is no more honored role than that of mother, He meant it.  Just as Israel split and was eventually destroyed, it will only be a matter of a few generations (if left unhindered) before the US falls to a similar fate.  

The Lord allowed for Saul to be anointed as King.  He warned it was a bad idea.  And He instituted some stop-gap measures that may minimize the damage.  That in no way meant that He was endorsing it.

Similarly, enough Saints are now asking for a king... err... working mothers.  Well, He gave them one.  Pres. Johnson. 

Can most women do the same?  Absolutely not!  Do some women have the ability to do such "juggling"? Of course.  But just as it was not a good idea to have kings, it is not a good idea to think that working mothers is the ideal to aspire to. 

There was a reason Mosiah wanted to change to a system of judges.  He reminded people of King Noah and his goons.  That's not the way he wanted us to live.

Your willingness to sacrifice will be seen by the Lord.  And you will be blessed for it.

BTW: Saul did not "sacrifice" as we think of it.  He collected not the firstlings, but the fatlings.  Big difference.  He only used sacrifice as a pretext to eat that yummy meat from the enemy flocks & herds.

YOU have sacrificed.

Edited by Carborendum
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I think the biggest factor involved is the motivation of the parent.  

Do the children know that Dad is out working to provide for the family.  But that he would rather be home if possible to spend time with his wife and children.

Or is Dad’s motivation acquiring a me wall, material toys, adultery, escape from an unsatisfactory home life, etc.

I see so many African American males who love and would do anything for their single mothers working one or more jobs.  I believe it is because the boys know that they are loved, that they are the main concern for the mother and that sacrifices have been made for them.

When children see a juggling mother who has multiple concerns and has her children as priority (other than #1) they know it.

 

Edited by mikbone
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyone remember Dr. Laura Schlessinger and her AM radio show?  She's made a career of urging moms to stay at home with their kids.  One of her books was "Don't have them if you don't want to raise them" if I remember correctly.

Her take on a mother's role doesn't rule out working outside the home.  It is all about prioritizing the child's needs, and being there when the child is home.  Once the kids were in school at age 5, she was totally down with moms pursuing careers, furthering their education, whatever - as long as it was done mostly during the hours the kid was in school.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

Once the kids were in school at age 5, she was totally down with moms pursuing careers, furthering their education, whatever - as long as it was done mostly during the hours the kid was in school.

I wonder what she would say now with the state of public schooling today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

I wonder what she would say now with the state of public schooling today.

Oh, she's still out there on her podcast saying stuff.  She's down with well-vetted private school and charter schools.  I don't think she's been particularly vocal about homeschooling, but as far as I know she thinks it's certainly a desirable option.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

Oh, she's still out there on her podcast saying stuff.  She's down with well-vetted private school and charter schools.  I don't think she's been particularly vocal about homeschooling, but as far as I know she thinks it's certainly a desirable option.

I was referring to the idea of "It's ok to work during school hours because the kids are in school during those hours."

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...