Calm

https://www.hrw.org/news/2025/09/09/trump-moves-to-restrict-gender-affirming-care-to-federal-workers-families I assume he means something like the above I believe the federal administration is also trying to do the same for anything under the ACA. https://www.cms.gov/files/document/MarketplacePIRule2025.pdf I believe the relevant stuff starts around page 155, but just got a call about insurance coverage myself and my brain is now unhinged, so this is it for now.

So you are saying that since Joseph used “those which” most of the time, if it was changed many times to “they/them which” it would most likely be intentional? If so why? What rule of behaviour is this based on? If that’s not it, could you explain why it isn’t probable?

Why can’t it just be random usage of two different phrases that sounded archaic to Joseph? If you have explained this earlier, I either missed it or didn’t understand your point.

Especially since not only do we have very different experiences and therefore very different sets of evidences we work with, we have been taught to evaluate this evidence very differently based on our cultures and subcultures. Someone who was taught sufferings means that God sees you as strong and is helping you grow in character, etc will evaluate their life very differently than someone who was taught prosperity is a sign of God’s favor. If one believes the latter, then objectively (because financial wealth is a pretty objective measure even if giving it a spiritual value is not) it would seem that God favors many selfish and greedy individuals more than he does the humble and poor. If one believes the former, then one could view the massive wealth some have as God allowing someone to damn themselves to hell.

Do you really want me to or are you being purely sarcastic?

The scriptures command us to gather together and share testimony; they don’t command that we provide opportunities for members to learn how to publicly speak more effectively. It was a good side benefit of being a member. Now they have kids teaching more. Bet that provides even more opportunities than maybe once a year talk…unless in a small branch and then opportunities for leadership, learning to be comfortable in speaking, etc. is quite different from what I have been told (only lived in a Utah ward for 4 months as an outsider, but only time in a branch was in Moscow and that was a very different experience).

You got me going too. I suspect the viewership of GC would go way up.

For me, it is very understandable why people doubt once they know how the brain operates, what different chemicals can make you feel when nothing else really changes as far as one can tell. I feel lucky that even experiencing this chaos, I still interpret how I feel as a connection from God, but that’s my choice and it is because it works for me, makes my life better. I know others’ lives aren’t affected the same way. It doesn’t help them make sense of the chaos, but makes it all more confusing. If God is supposed to be a God of order and the order is not there to be seen, is it surprising that some conclude that means God doesn’t exist? St least not in the way some are saying he does.

A nice label that allows you to dismiss it without considering what it might be like not to feel a connection with God. I am not impressed by the depth of your analysis or empathy. BTW, I don’t believe one has to agree with someone to be empathetic or to show it, even though it can be more difficult if you don’t.

To work with flawed individuals…certainly. However, perhaps there is the possibility that he could be micromanaging, sending angels/messengers with pre scripted talks and detailed policies. There would still be errors, but then he sends the messenger back until they get it close enough. Also could be “calling home” any president or apostle who gets even a little too creative. Give out prophecies that are soon enough and clear enough it makes it clear that the prophets are pretty accurate in conveying what God means. Now there would still be exceptions, but even there he could be very hands on in choosing bishops who would listen to him and rather than needing to do detailed prompts, a yes or no to the question “am I an exception” would suffice as they would direct the ones who were exceptions to seek out what God wants for them from God. The whole live by faith principle would be diminished to a great extent though. I wonder at times if he let us design the world in part to help us learn the far reaching consequences of our choices and like a lot of kids who have the safety they need currently, we thought we were capable enough to run things mostly by ourselves.

I have grown garlic chives and they do have a garlicky taste, they got dug up though when we put in a deck. Thanks for reminding me. Now I know what’s going in the planter.

I believe God allows flawed human beings to run the Church because if they were more effective, fewer would feel the need to seek out the Spirit for themselves. It is so much easier to look outside at another person for direction from God than it is to look inside and try to connect to the Spirit oneself….if only because we seem to be more willing to trust that the other isn’t struggling while we often know we are.

My dad was this way publicly and privately. He was a mechanical engineer (ended up the director of the main plane maintenance/repair center for United Airlines in San Fran). He would have made a good lawyer except he was too practical and that side of the law would have annoyed him.

Somehow I had missed this one…and his excuse and reasoning is as believable and as sound as ever. https://www.npr.org/2024/08/05/nx-s1-5063939/rfk-jr-central-park-bear-bicycle

And so not in nutrition.

Right….maybe if I was a democrat or admire the Kennedys or knew nothing of how actual scientific research is done, that might be persuasive….(but probably not….I feel the need to add this because of the good democrats I have known and here I mean good as in morality and righteousness, not good for the Party). In regards to the first two points…I am not and do not. Never have been, never did. Quite the opposite for the second point, in fact. In regards to the last….”research” is not a magic word bestowing authority on whatever it labels. There are standards for determining credible research. There are websites of people who have spent decades researching and proving to their own satisfaction the earth is flat. Do you think I should see their many years of research as trustworthy and relevant to actual science just because of the time they put into it? Do you think actual democrats think that way? If so, you need to get out and meet more people. PS: I really hope you were being sarcastic, perhaps you were actually thinking of a shared joke (as in you find the MAHA leadership problematic and contradictory—saying one thing and doing another—as well).

And that is an issue since anyone can claim God knows, but there is no way to prove it in mortality.

I really miss mushrooms, onions, garlic, chocolate, and wheat (can manage sourdough bread, it’s the sugars, not the gluten). But so much less problems with stomach and gut that I am not the least bit tempted….just in mourning. Thank goodness green onions work okay, but hing does not satisfy the garlic craving. Besides waffles, I can do without wheat as corn and rice flour work great. But mushrooms 😭 I wish there was some way to remove pressure changes from my life like food.

Something we should be constantly asking ourselves given what is said about tradition in the scriptures (just because something is traditional doesn’t mean it’s seen as good by God).

If only they put as much energy into the science and being accurate as they do the propaganda

I have used an electric tea kettle before, just a small one. It came in handy.

Would you “finance” sugar consumption since that can be more detrimental than coffee?

You don’t want Grandma to be going through caffeine withdrawal*** while she is visiting. Not a good way to entertain her. And it’s less financing than Grandma taking the car to Starbucks daily or multiple times daily. ***not that big of a deal for most, though could get severe headaches the second day or so, and wouldn’t last that long, but bad enough to dampen the fun.

I don’t think I would buy alcohol for someone out of the blue, even if I knew what I was doing, lol. High probability if a nonmember family member or friend expressed a desire to buy it together as a gift for someone who did drink and I knew they would choose something of quality that would be enjoyed, I would…though the science being what it is now, I might ask if they had another option. It does seem more personal to me than a gift card. If a member family member suggested it, I would share my reluctance…that based on the the science, not the WoW because I don’t see others as under covenant. I also dislike what I hear of the industry behind it, but that goes for many things I consume these days. If Christ instructed his disciples to drink in the past, to use wine in sacraments and will be drinking wine with us in the great reunion when there are no doubt other options to choose, I don’t see it as inherently evil. Matt 26 I have been given some wine by one of my daughter’s teachers as a thank you, I thought that was very sweet…the gesture, not the wine, though it was blackberry so maybe; my husband regifted it to a friend who knew we were LDS and understood why it would have felt wrong just to throw it away…teachers do not make that much, it was a sacrifice on his part, if small, I wanted to respect it.

Not or now?