Jump to content

Kenngo1969

Contributor
  • Content Count

    8,198
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

5,631 Excellent

About Kenngo1969

  • Rank
    Master of Bombast

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    Julie-Rowe-Inspired Tent City

Recent Profile Visitors

7,326 profile views
  1. Kenngo1969

    In case it turns out you are wrong...

    It makes no difference if there are two religions with competing truth claims, or twenty, or two hundred, or two thousand, or twenty thousand, or two hundred thousand, or two million. If someone whose beliefs differ from mine does his best to do what he believes God wants Him to do, to be a good person in the ways he believes matter to God, and to love, to serve, and to help his fellowman in the ways he believes God wants him to do, more power to him. Ditto the person who doesn't believe in God, but who tries to ease suffering and to make life as good as he can make it for as long as he can for himself and for those around him before (from his perspective) succumbing to the void. I can't very well ask that God judge him harshly, while, at the same time, asking that God judge me mercifully (see Matthew 7:2). If God is going to condemn any of the above to hell without an electric fan, he's not much of a god worth believing in or trying to follow, anyway. https://greatgourdini.wordpress.com/2012/04/16/toward-interreligious-oneness/
  2. Kenngo1969

    That Deadpool Poster

    I don't know. Can you?
  3. Kenngo1969

    That Deadpool Poster

    Even so, I gather that Deadpool isn't, in any way, akin to The Wonder Years? What? Just asking.
  4. Which subject is that, the efficacy of marijuana? You're quite right that I tend to be suspicious when the precise mechanism of a claimed remedy isn't well understood and when the list of symptoms and conditions it is claimed to help is long and disparate. I'm not convinced that legalization of marijuana will impact the use or abuse of other drugs.
  5. Wait, what? You mean, there was some question about whether Bill Reel wanted to wrap himself in the comfortable, fashionable twin cloaks of martyrdom and victimhood? Really? Oh. OK. If you say so. (And Brother Reel, if you happen to be reading this, sorry about all of the emoticons. I know how much you hate them.)
  6. While I suppose we can argue all day long about the implications of Proposition 2's passage, and whether we're enroute from sowing the wind to reaping the whirlwind, perhaps you didn't get the memorandum, but the proposition passed, MustardSeed. I'm sorry for the loss of your friends. It's too bad that, apparently, the Restored Gospel of Jesus Christ could not or did not help in that regard.
  7. "But, Ken, only marijuana will do the trick!" "But, Ken, only whole plant marijuana will do the trick!" "But, Ken, only whole plant marijuana will do the trick, and only if you smoke it!"* *These kinds of disingenuous arguments tell me everything I need to know about what's really going on here. As far as I'm concerned, I think sincere proponents of medicinal legalization are probably being used as pawns by those whose real aim is full, unfettered recreational legalization, and I think that once we sow that wind, inevitably, we'll reap the whirlwind. But that's another subject for another day. Leaving that aside, I offer the following For Your Consideration. And as far as your PEOPLE NEED HELP NOW schtick, if some drug(s) purporting to help all of the things Miracle Marijuana is purported to help had been hastily approved without going through the usual process (after all, PEOPLE NEED HELP NOW) but, actually, a direct causal link had been found that shows that the drug or drugs was or were actually killing people left and right (and yes, for purposes of this paragraph, I will concede that Miracle Marijuana, by contrast, is actually as harmless as all of its proponents say it is and has never harmed a soul: I'm simply using the hasty approval process hypothetical because PEOPLE NEED HELP NOW), why do I suspect that you'd be one of the first people screaming bloody murder? As as far as Miracle Marijuana never having actually hurt a soul, personally, I'm convinced that once legalization proponents get their way, Miracle Marijuana will become on a par with alcohol for killing people, we simply won't be able to prove how many people it has killed because, unlike alcohol, whose effects are measurable and predictable, no one knows what a "safe level" of Miracle Marijuana is for, e.g., operating a motor vehicle.
  8. Kenngo1969

    Is it time to end Testimony meetings?

    What is your native tongue, and/or where are you from?
  9. Kenngo1969

    Is it time to end Testimony meetings?

    Anything's possible, of course, including the possibility that testimony meetings could be discontinued to prevent them from being hijacked by people with agendas, but I doubt such a move is in keeping with the overall trajectory of what's been happening in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter--day Saints: Promoting less reliance on centrally-produced manuals and headquarters direction and more reliance on teaching by the Spirit and looking to local direction. Testimony meeting seems to be the quintessential example of the latter: One gets up as moved upon by the Spirit, speaks as moved by the Spirit, and so on. I doubt meetings will be quite as free-wheeling as this scripture seems to suggest, but I am reminded of Moroni 6:9.
  10. Kenngo1969

    Is it time to end Testimony meetings?

    Refiner's Fire: This may be off-topic somewhat, but your handle reminds me of my favorite verse of my favorite hymn. Economic realities of extensive lettering on headstones aside, I'd like it to be my epitaph:
  11. Kenngo1969

    Is it time to end Testimony meetings?

    Refiner's fire, +1. (That is, I would upvote your post if you had reached the required 25-post minimum to allow me to do so, so hurry up and accrue posts so I can upvote your content. ) And, welcome to the Board.
  12. Kenngo1969

    David Bokovoy on Mormon Stories

    I'm sorry, but it seems rather facile for you to deem yourself fit to criticize prior leaders of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints from, I presume, the comfort of heated (or air-conditioned, as the case may be), well-furnished, well-appointed, well-stocked surroundings, from behind the anonymity provided by a computer screen and a pseudonym. Those leaders of the Church of Jesus Christ rejected polygyny! How could they?! Just because the Church of Jesus Christ as an entity was essentially being disincorporated and/or dismantled, just because its properties were being seized, just because its leaders were being hounded into hiding and its members were being disenfranchised! Yes, things change from time to time in the Church of Jesus Christ, but if this particular "change" had not occurred, you wouldn't even get the opportunity to render your criticism from the comfortable circumstances previously described in which I presume you find yourself, because the Church as an institution would have ceased to exist, thus rendering your criticism moot! Perhaps that was your point ... that leaders of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints should have stuck to their guns (certainly, the anonymous you, who feels absolutely free to criticize that decision in the comfort of your current circumstances would have stuck to your guns had you found yourself in their circumstances ... right? ) Of course, such action would render your criticism moot, since the Church of Jesus Christ would have ceased to exist. Maybe you'd be just fine with that, but count me out!
  13. Kenngo1969

    David Bokovoy on Mormon Stories

    Seldom, if ever, is mere disbelief, without more, grounds for excommunication. Not a few people who still believe are and have been excommunicated.
  14. Kenngo1969

    David Bokovoy on Mormon Stories

    Fair enough. I'm sure Professor Bokovoy is a nice guy, and I'm inclined to live-and-let-live if someone holds a view about the genesis of the Book of Mormon that I do not (I wasn't there, and from an empirical perspective, I can understand why someone might be skeptical or might opt for a version of events that completely excludes the supernatural or whatever). But I'd rather believe that Nephi, Mormon, Moroni, et al were real people and be wrong than be standing in front of one or more of them sputtering, "B ... Bu ... But ... Professor Bokovoy said ..." (see 2 Nephi 9:29). See also the Q & A portion of Grant Hardy's 2016 FAIRMormon Conference presentation: See the full presentation here: https://www.fairmormon.org/conference/august-2016/more-effective-apologetics. As for me, my own thoughts echo Brother Hardy's second paragraph above: https://greatgourdini.wordpress.com/2014/01/15/joseph-moroni-me/ https://greatgourdini.wordpress.com/2013/01/01/encouragement-from-those-in-the-scriptures/ https://greatgourdini.wordpress.com/2017/03/16/the-imperfect-book-of-mormon/ https://greatgourdini.wordpress.com/2013/08/31/alma-32-book-of-mormon-historicity/
  15. Kenngo1969

    David Bokovoy on Mormon Stories

    Fair enough, but you are the one who's advocating the position that the "experts," because of their expertise, know more about what works to turn the lives of addicts around than the addicts themselves, from their own lived experience, do. Ever hear the old saying, "Give a man a fish, feed him for a day; teach a man to fish, feed him for a lifetime"? Essentially, your position (whether you want to admit it or not) is that it's better for the "expert fishermen" to hoard their knowledge by sharing only their fish rather than to benefit everybody by sharing their knowledge of how to fish. The paradigm which holds that "professionals" know best and that addicts can, should, and must depend on said professionals to "make" them well hasn't held sway for at least a generation.* If I'm dependent upon a professional to "make" or to "keep" me well, what happens when the professional isn't there? Yes, absolutely, professionals can suggest avenues of exploration, can provide guidance and insight as that exploration occurs, can act as sounding boards, can give a client the tools to facilitate his own recovery, and so on, but, ultimately, it's the addict who's responsible for his own recovery, else what happens when the fish run out or when the fishermen die, retire, or otherwise are unavailable? "Professional"-directed recovery makes an addict or someone else who has a behavioral health diagnosis dependent upon . . . the professional. I'll grant you, most professionals are competent, caring, and so on, but in that situation, what happens when the client's recovery takes a bad turn or goes south? Who do you think gets the blame? "Self"-directed recovery, by contrast, makes the person dependent upon . . . who? Oh, that's right! Himself! Professionals can provide invaluable help, but, ultimately, they are not responsible for my recovery! I am! Accord, see The Ten Principles of Recovery at the following address: https://myhealth.alberta.ca/Health/pages/conditions.aspx?hwid=ug4392&amp
×