Jump to content

The Nehor

Contributor
  • Content Count

    22,198
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by The Nehor

  1. I played with this a little bit a while back. I decided to get its take on Satanism: The hysterical crazies were right. Harry Potter is satanic.
  2. It is impractical because who is going to adjudicate that rape occurred? If the rapist is prosecuted do you go by the verdict? What happens if the proceedings drag on and it becomes a late term abortion or the baby is born. If they are found not guilty does that mean there was no rape even though not guilty is not innocence? Does a judge rule quickly? Sounds like a horrible job. So now a rape victim has to go to court to convince a judge? Sounds a little traumatizing. Back alley and unlicensed clinics inbound!
  3. Sometimes shooters want to say something first or head to the stand for a better view. Suddenly my idea to put a trap door behind the pulpit controlled by the bishop that drops you into a tank of sharks if your testimony gets irrelevant has other beneficial uses.
  4. Most LDS church attacks I know of were perpetrated by members. Coming up with a plan means the attacker can know the plan if they care at all to find out. Some wouldn’t bother, some might.
  5. So it could potentially possibly be used but has not so we should do something. Someone could theoretically kill someone with a spork. Where is the campaign to ban sporks? If steps need to be taken shouldn’t we target a practice that is tied to lots of cases of abuse? I actually worry this campaign is going to end up helping abusers. Abusive parents now have a ‘cover story’ to insist on being present during any interview and mitigate an abused child’s ability to seek help or escape. They tell the bishop they want to be there at any interview with their children. An older child comes to the bishop, more likely because some abuse to a younger child. The bishop calls in the parents. The child is dismayed and the parents ferret out afterwards what the child was trying to do. Punishment follows. I cannot substantiate that specific scenario but this is what happens when children are caught by abusive parents trying to get help.
  6. That is a standard “appeal to consequences”. It must be true because the reverse is too bad or terrifying to believe. You find it used the on the other side as the start of the theodicy difficulty. How could a good God have made this world?
  7. Or we could just not become an armed camp at all with private security, patsdowns, and metal detectors even if something does happen?
  8. I do not think relying on theological argument is a good idea. The truth must come by revelation or we must remain ignorant. The best theology is the one that is accurate whether it is satisfying or horrifying.
  9. What if alien killer crabs show up and attack us at church? What is the plan? Should we install a SAK Yes, a shooter is more likely but they are still rare for us and much more common in a synagogue. I do not want metal detectors and pat downs on the off chance of it happening.
  10. Logical does not mean proven. Or to mock this kind of guessing: 1. Yes. 2. Rare, but yes. 3. Conjecture, and I would argue and have argued that a bishop’s interview is a terrible time to try to manipulate and abuse or prepare for abuse. Babysitting is a better opportunity. It is (in terms of church) high profile, brief, and the child/teen is often awkward and nervous. There are much better ways to get close to the target. I still have not seen a substantiated case where an interview was used this way. Until then I am not willing to give up the good I have seen a few times where a bishop’s interview led to abuse being revealed and reported on the basis of a hypothetical.
  11. CFR This is asserted endlessly as if substantiated and proven. I would argue it is a really bad opportunity.
  12. Yet I claim it anyways. It is in the way they argue for it. Human behavior has patterns that are not that hard to read. I am not going to pretend ignorance. No One has produced anything substantial supporting the hypothesis that asking about the law of chastity is damaging or even grooming so I do not feel obligated to accept that standard either. I did say generally and not specifically. I am just claiming to know the motives of most of them.
  13. Not really. Bishop interviews are probably close to the worst time. The child or teen is probably on edge already unless they are older or confident (making them a worse target). Someone, usually many someones, are right outside the door. Often they have a key to the office and could come in unexpectedly. The duration of an interview is usually not long, especially with youth. If the parents are at all conscientious they will talk to the child or teen afterwards just to check in. It is almost a perfect storm of not being good for abuse except for the one on one nature. If I were looking for an opportunity to sexually abuse a teen or child I would target at a camp out or an activity and not something as public as an interview. The complaint that was voiced earlier (not in this quote) that talking to kids about chastity trains them to trust authority in talking about sex is also silly. School teachers teach Sex Ed. Parents hopefully teach before that. All authority figures. Both teaching much more. I hope you are not suggesting that they would be better off learning from peers instead of authority figures.
  14. You want evidence to support a claim about psychology. Yeah, good luck with that. You can play that game with anything. You can claim the guy this thread is about was not actually doing it for the sexual thrill, maybe it is a personal sociological experiment about the dangers of a surveillance society and he created this incident to highlight the problem. You would call me crazy and be right because it is obvious why he did it but you would be hard pressed to prove it.
  15. Yeah, but I am more trustworthy with my anecdotes than they are. It is not ad hominem. Ad hominem is attacking someone to discredit their argument. I am suggesting what their motives are. That does not discredit the argument. My argument that interviews end more abuse then they start is refutation. I am speculating about their motives for fun. I am also (speaking generally and not specifically) right about their motives.
  16. Oh yeah, guess I should say the spiritual experiences I have had and the miracles I have seen help.
  17. You mean statistical evidence? No. I am going to assume that my anecdotes cancel out the collected fan fiction that is constantly being referenced. You re demanding reference that someone in a specific emotional state? CFR that you are qualified to issue a CFR.
  18. I do too but I suspect seeing Him might answer them before I can ask them.
  19. This is also the case. I was talking to someone about the flaws in family courts and CPS and foster care the other day and how sometimes the cure ends up worse than the disease. He asked how to fix it as if there was an easy solution to make all that pain and torment not happen. You see kids who have been so mistreated with poison their whole life that people showing love is almost toxic to them. I suspect it is realizations like this that either deepen faith or destroy it. Dark night of the Soul stuff. Left to wonder at a God that would hold back and allow it. I have mentioned before that if God showed up in a family court and admitted entrusting his children into the care of many of the parents they were sent to God would be up on child endangerment charges and lose parental rights. I can only try to summon up faith it is worth it between those times when the Holy Ghost shares the endgame and I know it is.
  20. I suspect the flawed fallen body is a limitation to the spirit in many ways but opens up new experiences in ways spirits could not function. What matters is what the state of the spirit is when it leaves. Then we get a body fit for the spirit within. A damaged body or brain incorrectly represents the spirit within and probably does in general just for being in a fallen world where spirits do not really belong at all. Some spirits in flawed bodies will be surprisingly pure. Much of what we thought was important will probably die with the flesh too and hopefully in the next world we will find what we truly wanted and that the earthly simile is only a pale reflection. In the pure fusion of resurrection with no death the body and spirit will be one instead of competitors as they often are now. Just my suspicions anyway.
×
×
  • Create New...