Jump to content

rpn

Members
  • Posts

    3,031
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

3,477 profile views

rpn's Achievements

Grand Master

Grand Master (14/14)

  • Reacting Well Rare
  • Dedicated Rare
  • Very Popular Rare
  • First Post
  • Posting Machine Rare

Recent Badges

2.3k

Reputation

  1. However he may feel personally, the fact is that his enterprise is oriented to Christians who have long declared that members of the restored Church of Jesus Christ aren't Christian because we don't accept the Nicene Creed. His use of the set in Goshen and UTAH references have no doubt been troublesome for many of the Chosen supporters who are in that camp (which likely is why he couldn't keep using the Goshen site and left for TX, even if the they could have stayed (it was described from the first as temporary and having to do with what is at the set in terms of buildings. Jesus didn't spend a whole lot of time in Jerusalem (at least in the Biblical record), after all.) .
  2. I tend to see the Word of Wisdom less about the details and more about opting in to being in Their tribe. More like the killing the firstborn lamb and putting its blood over the door so the Angel of Death would passover your house (to mark you as Theirs). And to a lesser extent, I think it could be about agency. Most of the substances involve wasting money and time and getting to the point where the substance use rules the lives of those who use it, leaving less time, money, and even desire to do the things that help us become like Them (or at least bless the lives of Their children).
  3. The unemployment rate is how many people are applying for unemployment funds. Many of those not working now aren't eligible because they are doing work at home or because they are the gig economy or something else that removes them from unemployment financial support.
  4. My point is that children who are not accountable don't NEED any of the saving ordinances. And you can bet they are not forgotten by their parents, whether or not such parents record them on family group sheets or otherwise.
  5. Baptisms aren't required for children who die before age 8 in our theology, and although I'm aware of a number of such cases done by proxy for dead people, I don't know that they are actually needed anyway. So there is nothing at all inconsistent with stillborn children not having temple ordinances done, even if they are and will be resurrected having fulfilled the measure of creation.
  6. And when the Constitution doesn't mention rights, then they aren't protected BY THE CONSTITUTION. That has always been the fight about Roe v. Wade ---- that the the Supreme Court wanted the outcome and created a right that simply didn't exist. (Amendment 9 does say that "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." Is that plainly that if it isn't within the constitution doesn't prevent a right that the public owns from existing or interfere with it being valued? The right to travel among states IS protected explicitly in the constitution The 14th amendment doesn't destroy that everything else belongs to states at all. It DOES prohibit states from "make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." BTW: I agree that citizens should pass state constitutional amendments that give women the power to choose for themselves whether to abort. I think that a whole bunch of men in state legislators have no business at all at forcing reproductive decisions on women (although I do think married men, and men in partnerships that do not involve violence/abuse should have the right to at least knowledge of a pregnancy and a conversation about it). And I think that legislators who've past abortion prohibitions without an exception for rape are either immensely cruel or do not understand that such a law is like the state raping those women again, because it is only in having the choice that any woman feel okay in choosing to give birth to that child,whether or not she can raise him/her. Eliminating the exception likely means that more such cases will be terminated early, because it is either then or never and rape survivors have a hard time getting to any level of peace with the results of the rape. I also think states that pass restrictions should have a concomitant duty to financially support the mothers moving forward (abortion research proves that financial support does eliminate a lot of abortion choices). NOTE: Nothing in the above should be read to infer that I support abortion. I do not. I do support a mother's rights to choose until viability and thereafter in cases of rape and health of the mother, and unsurviability of the child.
  7. Why? Do you have legal expertise in this arena? Not trying to be snarky just wondering why you think this. Because there isn't a single word in the constitution that identifies abortion choice as a right protected by the constitution. The Supreme Court created it not from constitutional words or historical expectations. The filibuster is NOT constitutional. It i not found in the constitution and I believe came about in the late 1800s. It is a procedural issue and can be done away with anytime the senate decides to do so. You misunderstood my point. The Constitution gives very limited subject matter legislative rights to Congress. And it says that other than the five or six areas specifically given to congress, EVERYTHING else belongs to the states. I suppose Congress could propose a constitutional amendment prohibiting states from regulating abortion, and if it were timely ratified by enough states, abortion could be legalized in all states. But any federal law about abortion rights would be unconstitutional.
  8. I don't think it has ever been constitutional. And the Congressional members who are talking about doing away with the filibuster to pass a law don't seem to get that THAT would also be unconstitutional because the issue is NOT one of the limited powers of Congress. Having said that, and being opposed to abortion generally, I will be lobbying in my state for a constitutional amendment that does not make abortion illegal. My version includes the following items: 1) Until or unless the legislature includes at least 51% women, the state legislature cannot pass any law about abortion. I hate that men are deciding what is right for women and society. 2) Those who are pregnant because of rape can terminate that pregnancy whenever they choose. (This is the only way to give back their power to these survivors so that they can freely choose to birth and place for adoption or raise. As a rape survivor, I am appalled that legislators don't understand that they are raping the survivors all over again when they insist on controlling such decisions. That it is only when a survivor has full power to choose that they may be able to be able to give birth without further and long lasting personal damage. And there should be laws against anyone who raped anyone having any legal rights involving any child born out of that event, whether it was reported or prosecuted or not. (Not sure how to adequately protect the survivor and child when the perp didn't perceive it as rape.) 3) Married women or women who are spending time overnight at their partners homes ("living with them", though it would probable have to be spent at least 5 overnights in the last 30 days or something) should be required to tell the father that they are considering aborting the child before an abortion provider can do it. I don't think that fathers should have veto, but I do think it wrong for the state to fail to recognize both parents should at least have a discussion about it, absent domestic violence. 4) Abortions for fetal deformities that are not fatal (or for expected disabilities) should be prohibited, but the state should have a fund to support parents financially who have and raise those children. 5) I also think that if legislatures prohibits abortions, then it also ought to agree to pay the parents of newborns a monthly sum to raise the ones that aren't aborted. The US is following the rest of the world in limiting births and if the US also continues to discourage immigration, we are soon going to find ourselves without a sufficient workforce to support our population. We need to be encouraging new births and that means we absolutely should be paying a stipend to parents (whether they work or don't) to make having/raising children easier. Maybe we should tie some of the amount to whether the parents are also raising the children in ways that produce good outcomes, but there should be a basic amount. (Much of the abortion research suggests that mothers who get a little support choose not to abort.) 6) And then legislators should spend funds campaigning on the value of children in society to persuade mothers not to abort, that there is a manageable outcome other than abortion.
  9. We've al read stories about people making it up and then not knowing how to get themselves out of it or eventually it becoming their reality. There is even a medical term for it --- hypochondria. For some conditions it isn't sub-conscious even. If you are afraid of how it might turn out, you can just preplan to avoid things. And hooray for anyone recognizing an uncomfortable situation and planning how to deal with it. Not in my book. For some mental health conditions we don't know the (or all of the) biological components, or very much about them. And even if they were self-inflicted, that wouldn't make them illegitimate. But part of the reason mental health is so tough is that we don't use what we know works, very well, and we sell and use a lot of drugs that don't necessarily improve anything. For instance: Any one with depression or anxiety, SHOULD get Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, which is even research proven effective for teen depression. Many therapists claim they do it, but few actually do with fidelity. It teaches healthy thinking skills. When you know how to talk to yourself authentically/healthily AND DO IT CONSISTENTLY, it is so much easier to get around and over obstacles.
  10. I was in Airport Management. And what we all said is that the hardened cockpit doors that everyone had known for years would stop hijackings was going to happen with lightning speed. And it did: suddenly airlines were no longer arguing that was too expensive.
  11. Shouldn't this really be according to the people they became based on what they did? The laws aren't our purpose, they are our guidelines.
  12. I don't think time travel is or will be part of our earthly experience. We each need to come unto Christ and be perfected in Him in our own world and with the experiences into which we are born, and which we choose for ourselves. I do think there will likely be a time when we know about others of God's people on other planets or in places we don't know about yet. But our earthly experiences are intend to help us become like our heavenly parents and Savior and that is in the here and now that we live out that and become like Them.
  13. We don't proselytize Jews because the scriptures put them in a separate and distinct group with specific promises and timing. At least that is my understanding. The jews as a people (though not necessarily any of the Judaic versions or culture or groups), are already God's people (though the state of Israel doesn't act like it in its interaction with Palestinians much).
  14. I don't challenge the idea that Christ was angry (though He might not have been, His actions would have made anyone watching assume He was, at least --- it surely is described like those who wrote about it in the records we have thought He was). And I do think it entirely appropriate to be angry in some circumstances. And I think that righteous anger doesn't last long and effects change, not retribution.
  15. rpn

    Prepent?

    I can't imagine a more heinous thing --- it would be like flipping off the Savior. Prepenting if intentional and real, would make sinning impossible. And there is nothing worse than setting up one's sin trying to avoid consequences (though I suppose there is some honor in trying to protect innocents from as much as possible).
×
×
  • Create New...