Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by mtomm

  1. If the Church has the resources to follow the law regarding watering lawns in every municipality in the USA it has the resources to help every single victim of abuse it becomes aware of. I really don't understand these "well, it's complicated" responses. If I alone am aware of three instances of abuse where the Church and it's representatives did nothing or covered it up the amount of "do nothing" out there must be massive. I really think we can work out a perpetrator's redemption in the next life just like so many of those other unanswered problems we plan working out then.
  2. The Church has the capacity and the resources to figure out complicated things. They do it everyday. They hire employees and outsource to professionals and third-parties to make sure they get it right. (Or maybe they out-source to limit the liability now that I think about it...) Bishops and leaders deserve better representation and training on how to help victims of abuse. Throwing your hands up in the air and shrugging shoulders doesn't seems like a Christ-like response.
  3. Disagreeing and shaming not the same thing. But this is such a bad derail and I apologize to the board for my part in it!
  4. I have no idea what he was thinking and that wasn't important. It was his actions that has colored my opinion of him. So yes, continue to tell me I can't have that opinion because obviously I don't know what I saw with my own eyes and therefore cannot form my own opinions and if I did they certainly can't be right because you've not had the same experience I've had.
  5. I think this is rather a significant observation. How come living men can be sealed to more than one spouse but living women are denied this?
  6. Just one note to your observation about me. I have had the opportunity to watch Justice Thomas sitting on the bench in the Supreme court and it is also part of what shapes my feelings about him.
  7. Oh, I can think of a lot of others but they not be appropriate for this venue. 🙂
  8. I remember his confirmation hearings. I believe Anita Hill. I believe the actions she described are evil. I am not ashamed for calling him evil. He sits on the court and he should not be a political enemy. However, since the beliefs and actions of his best friend may be influencing him perhaps it is more difficult for him to remain non-political and that's not my fault.
  9. Actually, in his opinion he isn't even giving credence to their claim only addressing what their claim is. I withdraw my complaint he is stupid. I'm still holding onto evil for other reasons though. And can I just say that the HeLa cells lines probably have a much more dark ethical history than aborted fetal cells.
  10. And with contraception failure we will still have how many unwanted pregnancies? Are men okay with not having sex with fertile women? Are they saying no? Are they saying, "well, dear since no contraception is 100% effective and we don't want anymore children we should just abstain."
  11. This is what we are dealing with on the SUPREME Court of the United States. Holy hell. If that doesn't scare all of us it should. Clarence Thomas is very stupid or just plain evil.
  12. Thanks to our right to bear arms there should be plenty of very destructive weapons for it.
  13. I agree, unfortunately many members of the church in my area do not share our impression!
  14. So he skirts it by never mentioned the actual Church in his comments but it does come with a wink, wink. Really chaps my hide.
  15. Nothing chaps my hide more than when someone uses God and their religion to campaign. Here is a local member of my state legislature (he lost his re-election in the primary thank goodness). This is so disrespectful in my eyes. It's hijacking the scriptures, the Church (he is LDS) and the Savior for your own gain.Since this has been happening for many years now the Church must be okay with it? Perhaps they agree with this type of rhetoric? I hope this is on-topic because it's what came to my mind immediately upon reading the OP.
  16. The "government" meaning our elected officials are scared of us using their guns on them. Like how does that even work? Who exactly are we fighting? Who are these people? It's the most ridiculous comment about having a gun. "We" are going to save ourselves from someone with tanks and howitzers? Silly. What if your neighbors are fighting WITH the government? Why do gun owners think that every other gun owner is going to join them in the fight? "Liberals stop being liberals when they get mugged." Let me CFR that for you. "The adage that a conservative is a liberal who has been mugged is not supported in this research, as differences in the experience of criminal victimization do not have an effect on punitive attitudes in our study..."
  17. Gun free zones: Eh. I'm not convinced that those looking to do these It sounds so free. You know we are the freest country on earth as we walk into our locked down buildings with metal detectors and armed guards. So FREE! I feel so safe and free in the USA. What a joke that everyone keeps claiming that more guns make us safer and freer.
  18. Are you suggesting that we base our laws concerning procreation around this scripture? Because I'm thinking those of us who are advocating pro-choice regulation of abortion don't expect everyone in the United States to follow the commandments in the Bible. It's kind of the point of having religious freedom. We can't compel people to follow our religious tenets. So those in here who keep quoting scripture or sharing the words of the prophets are preaching to choir.
  19. Nope. I didn't say that at all. I'm just more inclined to fault on the side of the mother and doctor in this situation. And will again say that some regulation is warranted in situations after viability. And even at that point I'm not sure how often it is actually a concern since there are so few doctors that will actually even consider those types of abortions. Here is an example of what I find overly intrusive and not medically necessary but is required in many, many states: A woman is required undergo an ultrasound before she is allowed to have an abortion. Now, these are those cute little US where you see them rubbing a wand over the mother's belly. Nope, because the fetus is so small these are an internal US. They serve no purpose other than to shame and humiliate the mother. There is no medical reason to require this procedure. And those aren't an exception, it is every woman.
  20. Is it fair to say you trust the state government to make these choices rather than trusting a woman and her doctor? Because that's kind of the vibe I'm getting.
  21. So you are saying your compromise is you don't have a compromise?
  22. I asked this question at the beginning of the thread. I do not see how this is possible without a huge violation and certainly breaching a person's right to privacy. But we know that right to privacy really doesn't exist even for a rape victim.
  23. Second question for pro-lifers: How does a woman go about proving or claiming incest or rape in order to receive the abortion she desires? My thoughts: These exceptions are why I am pro-choice. I do not see how the above can be corroborated in a timely manner and without causing more harm to the victim. I shouldn't have to prove to the state that I was a victim of rape or incest in order to have an abortion. And in order to protect those victims (small number as they may be) they must have the option without being questioned by the state to abort. I also feel that once a fetus reaches the point of viability that it is no longer an option. Also, if a child will not be living outside the womb because of fetal abnormalities then abortion should be an option. This squares my opinion that we shouldn't be obligated to prolong someone's life just because it is hard to let them go. We can remove life support, etc. in order to let the dying die as peacefully, quickly and comfortably as possible.
  • Create New...