Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Bill “Papa” Lee

I find myself in disagreement with the Church’s position, what is to be done.

Recommended Posts

13 hours ago, rpn said:

Posts here have misinterpreted the Church position.    The policy doesn't "allow" abortions, or support abortion, or agree with abortion even in the extreme circumstances.   It merely declines to take disciplinary action against a person in specific circumstances.   That is fundamentally different, and well supported by tradition and doctrine.   Absent revelation from God,  that apparently no set of Church leaders has received, about when live begins, and/or about whether a mother must give birth even when the infant is not expected to live, or the mother is expected to die,  replacing church leaders views of what clearly doctrinally is between the member and God, for the member's decision, is just not consistent with agency.    It is not our leaders job to decide what is a personal decision.   It IS absolutely the obligation of members to determine their path, and be sure it is consistent with His will.  

I find it entertaining (or maybe hypocritical) that it is the party that deplores overburdening government who urges government to control this decision.   And I hope that if I were ever in that position, I would have the courage and faith and mental health to be able to carry the child to term.   But I do not want my government deciding things we don't know scientifically or doctrinally.   I think Roe v. Wade balances that well (and I think the science will come that viability is earlier than 20 weeks, but no where near 8 weeks).

I wish I could give you 50 rep points for this. So many members still want to be relieved of the burden of making decisions for themselves. They are perfectly happy with the stupid pronouncement, “When the brethren have spoken, the thinking has been done.” That’s what our Lord wants, a Kingdom full of non-thinkers. 🤪

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
22 hours ago, USU78 said:

The argument has been made that the pioneers were settlers, not migrants.  There were very few settlements of any kind, American, Mexican, or Amerind, in the Great Basin in 1847 or even within the contours of the later State of Deseret.  The pioneers came with the intent to settle, farm, and raise the next generation.  Just what is the MS-13 puke's intention?

Ask the dead Ute natives who died at Latter-Day Saint hands if they can tell the difference in intent. I am not trying to create a false equivalency here. I do not think gang members and Latter-Day saint pioneers are remotely the same but your attempts to make immigration law Holy somehow is laughable and characterizing a gang member as a typical immigrant is just xenophobia.

Oh, and just to annoy you: God protected Samuel the Lamanite who definitely did not have an official visa to enter the city or a permit to preach on that wall. Abinadi defied legal exile in reentering the city illegally. Presumably they are both burning in hell for their sins.

22 hours ago, USU78 said:

In any case, all of Mexico, including what was later ceded to the US in 1848, was under the occupation jurisdiction of the US Army.   I've never seen anybody from the DOD ever lodge any complaint that the Mormon settlers were unwelcome in the very sparsely settled Great Basin in 1847 or at any later time.

Oh yeah, the US federal government was always perfectly okay with the Mormons living in the Salt Lake Valley. Does the Utah War not count as a DoD complaint?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
4 hours ago, nuclearfuels said:

I don't see it as "urging govt control of this decision."  It's more like  - hey, should we authorize the gov't to take money we earned, by force, via taxes, (taxes or prison is the choice) and use some of those taxes to fund murdering babies.  Seems like an odd move - say for example a person of any faith/religion objected to killing babies - the choice is currently: pay taxes or goto jail; those taxes will go where the guiltless Congress decides. Don't like it? Run for office.

And from that, you find the opposing party to be controlling. 

 

But enough about the government funding drone strikes.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Ask the dead Ute natives who died at Latter-Day Saint hands if they can tell the difference in intent. I am not trying to create a false equivalency here. I do not think gang members and Latter-Day saint pioneers are remotely the same but your attempts to make immigration law Holy somehow is laughable and characterizing a gang member as a typical immigrant is just xenophobia.

Oh, and just to annoy you: God protected Samuel the Lamanite who definitely did not have an official visa to enter the city or a permit to preach on that wall. Abinadi defied legal exile in reentering the city illegally. Presumably they are both burning in hell for their sins.

Oh yeah, the US federal government was always perfectly okay with the Mormons living in the Salt Lake Valley. Does the Utah War not count as a DoD complaint?

false equivalency.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
18 hours ago, Calm said:

What percentage of such predictions are wrong though?

How many women hoped the doctor was wrong and made their decision on that encouraged by friends and family and then when it turned out doctors were right, were left on their own to care for their special needs child?  And one parent taking off leaving the burden fully on the other is not unusual from what I have seen.

We need to be careful not to give false hope to parents that are then unprepared for caring for their child.  I am not suggesting abortion is the solution, I think better and cheap services to support families with special needs kids are much, much more needed

I don’t know the percentages, I just know in my family it happened twice. Having said that, it is indeed a tragedy when a Father leaves, and the Mother is left to care for a special needs baby. My wife used to care for “special needs children”, and she has six lifelong friends as a result (both Mother and Father). In each case the Mother’s certainly know the demands and burdens of caring for these children. Thankfully, all three had Fathers who remained, but these three were devoted members of the Church  Despite the fact these children will be living elsewhere for their entire lives, meaning they will never be “empty nesters”, they would do it all again. BTW, those Doctor’s did not know the children were at risk. But, as you said, “I am not suggesting abortion is the solution”, but sadly and horribly women are killing in many cases, healthy babies. Also, in some States politicians are trying to allow abortions even when and if, women are in labor. In fact, some are even advocating that if a baby is born alive, that the woman be allowed to let the baby die, if the umbilical cord is still attached. Some even citing that emotional distress is, or falls under the umbrella of the abortion threatening the “life of the Mother”. This way is how to violate the laws on third term abortions. 

So, what now...if childbirth causes a woman distress to the Mother, end it. Even more frightening, as in all cases, even if the woman wants to claim distress to abort, while in labor. Should the Father object, he will be ordered out of the room, if necessary by security, and if he continues to object, escored out by the police in handcuffs. No matter how it is framed, it is just bad law. The Church has no right to interfere with these decisions, but it has every right to deal with this matter where Church standing is an issue, or where Temple Recomends are concerned, up and to Church discipline is required. Which of course brings us back to the intent, and discussion of this thread. So as a member in good standing, and relating to Church policy, which I freely admit, until this thread I did not have the full picture, I do now address address certain posts that rules allow. It is not my business or call what others do, but I hope all will acknowledge I can express my concerns. Or, I hope so. after all these years that most here  know, I am not the kind of person who does this 💣

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, The Nehor said:

Ask the dead Ute natives who died at Latter-Day Saint hands if they can tell the difference in intent. I am not trying to create a false equivalency here. I do not think gang members and Latter-Day saint pioneers are remotely the same but your attempts to make immigration law Holy somehow is laughable and characterizing a gang member as a typical immigrant is just xenophobia.

Oh, and just to annoy you: God protected Samuel the Lamanite who definitely did not have an official visa to enter the city or a permit to preach on that wall. Abinadi defied legal exile in reentering the city illegally. Presumably they are both burning in hell for their sins.

Oh yeah, the US federal government was always perfectly okay with the Mormons living in the Salt Lake Valley. Does the Utah War not count as a DoD complaint?

giphy.gif

Share this post


Link to post
On 6/5/2019 at 1:32 PM, mfbukowski said:

But Rococo always yields to Neo Classic  scientism and hedonism, and here we are. ;)

I am hoping for Impressionism to return, so what we see is light and not what people THINK is real. No coincidence that Romanticism came next...

;)

Big wheel keep on turnin'... 

It'll happen 

Keep trying to place Disco in that dialectical flowchart of yours; keep failing.  Thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)
43 minutes ago, USU78 said:

Keep trying to place Disco in that dialectical flowchart of yours; keep failing.  Thoughts?

Lol. Or for that matter Hip Hop. But honestly I think the trends are cyclical.

Perhaps instead of seeing our time As neoclassical we can see it as Renaissance, and of course what is important about both is the complete humanism of both ages.

So I'll that view  ; that would make us more like Mannerism with all the exaggeration and strange proportions excetera. Everything stretched out of shape. 

But I tell you one thing for sure. I remember sitting at the UCLA library reading Hegel, staring at the clock representing time second-by-second ticking by and thinking only of the repeated riff on this Beatles song that had just come out. To this day I can't get that image out of my brain.

Th riff begins the song, but To get the full Hegel effect you have to get the last 3 minutes, starting at about 4:40.

I would lie on the floor in my dorm room with the two stereo speakers on each side of my head, contemplating the Zeitgeists as they went by.

Heavy, dude. ;)

The ending is very provocative for a Hegelian.  

What a long strange trip its been.

 

Edited by mfbukowski

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, nuclearfuels said:

false equivalency.

True, applying the scriptures to our own day is probably a fool’s errand. I will give it up.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
14 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Lol. Or for that matter Hip Hop. But honestly I think the trans are cyclical.

Perhaps instead of seeing our time As neoclassical we can see it as Renaissance, and of course what is important about both is the complete humanism of both ages.

So I'll that view that would make us more like Mannerism with all the exaggeration and strange proportions excetera. Everything stretched out of shape. 

But I tell you one thing for sure. I remember sitting at the UCLA library reading Hegel, staring at the clock representing time second-by-second ticking by and thinking only of the repeated riff on this Beatles song that had just come out. To this day I can't get that image out of my brain.

Th riff begins the song, but To get the full Hegel effect you have to get the last 3 minutes, starting at about 4:40.

I would lie on the floor in my dorm room with the two stereo speakers on each side of my head, contemplating the Zeitgeists as they went by.

Heavy, dude. ;)

The ending is very provocative for a Hegelian.  

What a long strange trip its been.

 

That is one nasty bass line.  Love it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Posted (edited)

Edit: This was a stupid post and I decided to kill it. I apologize for the inconvenience of thread readers. Please continue to the next post.

Edited by The Nehor

Share this post


Link to post
12 hours ago, nuclearfuels said:

Isaiah 3:12 - As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee (politicians) cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths.

I doubt the Church is moving toward a pro-choice, pro-murder-the-innocent stance. You may have been misinformed about the current position.

Let Hollywood take it's murderous filth and blood money elsewhere. GA will continue growing, especially greater Atlanta. 

 Forgive me, but I have stated a number of times, when I first posted, I did not have full context. Sadly I used a SL Trib’s edited version of the policy. I now know otherwise, a members are no longer able to close threads. 

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...