Jump to content

Stargazer

Contributor
  • Content Count

    8,625
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

5,327 Excellent

About Stargazer

  • Rank
    Observing the heavens since 1951.
  • Birthday 10/03/1951

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    West Sussex, UK
  • Interests
    Religion, science, technology, computers (especially computer programming), foreign languages!

Recent Profile Visitors

5,049 profile views
  1. No. Temple file names do include such, but certainly not exclusively. I believe the vast majority of those are sourced from extraction efforts.
  2. The government of Brazil is an atrocious mess. This article makes it abundantly clear, although I was aware of this already. It makes one despair for humankind, actually.
  3. That's an interesting question, meaning the question of polyandry in general, not whether @nuclearfuels is supportive of it. One of my favorite sci-fi authors, Robert A. Heinlein, in his novel "The Moon is a Harsh Mistress" posited the Moon as a penal colony for the world, where the nations of the earth shipped their undesirables and criminals. Because most criminals are men, this penal colony had a shortage of women, and Heinlein described systematic forms of polyamory that resulted, including what he called "line marriages" and polyandry. Heinlein figured that in order to somehow have access to women, men would grudgingly go along with sharing them with others. I do kind of wonder if something like that will become a "thing" in China, where the "one-child policy" (now ended) has caused a dearth of marriageable women in certain age-groups. I've not heard that this has happened, however.
  4. I think you're mistaking name extraction with the normal personal research that individuals do. The "name extraction" program (two different versions) have been putting names into the temple system since 1977. In 1989 they reached the milestone of 100 million names. In a 1989 Ensign article it was stated "A few years ago, the stake record extraction program was furnishing about 85 percent of the names submitted to temples for ordinance work. But that percentage has dropped as individual members have increased their own activity in family history; individuals now furnish about one-third of the names." That's admittedly 30 years ago, but my wife and I work regularly at the London temple, and in initiatory and sealing sessions it seems that at least half the names coming through are "temple file", from the name extraction programs. There's plenty of work to do, no worries.
  5. I don't think there is the suggestion here of a type of marriage initiated by the Church. The scripture seems to be indicating that conditions will be so extreme that some women would be driven to having to share a husband.
  6. I had always taken this scripture to refer to a shortage of marriageable men so that in order to get married ("called by thy name") several women would have to share a husband -- and to make the man amenable to this, they would not require him to support them financially. A situation which would -- and could -- occur in the case of a devastating war in which many young men were killed, but which left most young women alive. In the Paraguayan War (1864–1870) Paraguay lost huge numbers of men. The exact figures are highly disputed, but it may have been up to half the population, and of course, most of the dead were men. ETA: I guess that's already been addressed.
  7. I don't think the temple system wants ANY duplication. I think it would constitute actual mockery to proxy baptize people whose work had knowingly already been done. But the temple / family search systems used to be rife with duplication. Back ten or fifteen years ago when I was working on a particular branch of my family, it turned out that there were three others in different areas of the US who were working the same branch, all of us completely unaware of what the others were doing. It turned out that after I had gotten one ancestor baptized, their endowment was done by someone else, and sealings completed by another someone else. And meanwhile, they had done a duplicate baptism, and so did the others. By the time it was all done each of some of these ancestors had had three or four complete sets of ordinances done! The ordinances that were performed first were the ones that the system finally gravitated to. It's different now. The family search system looks very capably for possible duplicates. There's plenty of name extraction still going on, too, and thus no lack of ordinances to be performed.
  8. There was a remodel of the London Temple some time back which increased its capacity. It has 4 ordinance rooms now, and offhand I can't be sure how many patrons can each room can hold, but it might be as many as 100. Perhaps I shall count them next time I'm there.
  9. I realize that Orange Man Bad, but the real false logic is to impute all wrong to Trump while worshipping at the foot of the Obama statue. No president is without sin. Can't compare two US presidents? Why not?
  10. It's a metaphor, Meadowchik. Not meant to be taken literally. Related to the old "all bark and no bite". Which means "Full of talk that is more threatening or impressive than that which one can or will actually do." The one time he had a chance to do actual damage, after that US drone was shot down by Iran over the Persian Gulf, he terminated the retribution mission because he thought that the casualties that would be incurred were not proportional to the damage done. I suspect that he offered US military support to Mexico while being fairly sure the offer wouldn't be accepted.
  11. I don't disagree, but even if we live all the highest laws in mortality, we'll still be limited, just at a higher level; I'm just saying that our fallen condition is part and parcel with standing on this side of the veil -- but when we get our resurrected brain, we will no longer be limited by it, because it will be celestialized.
  12. I didn't say you were pleased with Obama. I just heard the same kind of crap talk about Obama that some on the right (including Trump) were spewing forth. The man has a big mouth, and so every sensitivo on earth gets offended. Doesn't mean he's going to start WW3. Barking dogs and all that; it's the quiet ones we need to worry about.
  13. This "fear and dislike" of Trump is exactly well-founded as the fear and dislike of Obama on the right was. And is being fueled in this case by media political hacks who are still aghast that their anointed candidate didn't win. I didn't vote for Trump, but even I can see that the only thing really wrong with him is that he says what he believes. And that annoys some people. Let's keep this up so the thread can get closed!
×
×
  • Create New...