Calm

Any remote chance you know or knew the Lundquists (Molens were the in-laws they were living with)? Uncle who lived near that church, I think my cousin lives there now, but ever since my mom and uncle died, contact has been minimal….which is too bad, because that was the family I was closest to in my extended family. I can’t remember what church building they were assigned to when I hung out a lot over there (college years). One of my cousins was my son’s age. They were so cute together as wee ones.

In certain contexts I believe it is important for language to be very consistent (science, legal, and medical), but even these areas can allow for variation as long as definitions are given. There may be other cases where language needs to be more rigid, but I love the fluidness of language. Makes writing and speaking much more fun. Currently I am trying to see every now and then if I can stump AI by using reasonable, but not typical and often as far as I am aware novel phrasing (though it’s likely that someone somewhere has created ‘new’ words in the same fashion or created a ‘new’ idiom using much the same wording). Something another human would get even if it took a second. Pretty impressed with its predictive ability, but then with the sheer mass of variety of human language data it has to pull from makes it less surprising that it’s capable of matching my snide remarks with some of its own.

Is this missing a phrase? As in “when a person says a trans woman is a woman”?

I asked AI “respond to this claim”: “The key logical error in the original claim is treating “binary” and “spectrum” as if they must describe the same property at the same level of analysis. They don’t.”

I think this is important to consider.

I have no clue what the time/stamp would be if it’s not attached to a screenshot already. The offending post was already screenshot and added to this thread in case he disappeared it before nemesis saw it. I don’t think he can remove his account and the other info is in my posts already. In case this gets taken seriously and they contact Nemesis, I think he needs to be aware of it first.

Someone suggested this may be the root of the speculation: https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/leadership-instruction-october-2023/summary-how-meetinghouses?lang=eng “ We have been commanded to gather together often to remember Jesus and strengthen each other in Him: “I give unto you … a commandment that you assemble yourselves together, and organize yourselves, and prepare yourselves, and sanctify yourselves” (Doctrine and Covenants 88:74). Meetinghouses provide opportunities for receiving ordinances, teaching and ministering one to another (see 3 Nephi 26:19; Moroni 6:5–6), and welcoming friends. They serve multiple functions: Worship and ordinances Teaching Activities Administration Ongoing efforts are making meetinghouses more Christ centered and inviting. Some of these efforts include: Adapting to local culture and environment. Choosing meetinghouse art that is Christ centered and inclusive. Incorporating policy adjustments in the General Handbook for use of meetinghouses outside of Sunday meetings. We are considering opportunities to improve the focus on the Savior and ordinances and provide a more joyful experience for members and friends. These opportunities include: Flexible and adapted designs for new construction. Adjustments to existing buildings.” Someone else described this YouTuber as the LDS version of the National Enquirer, so accuracy is unlikely to be high if so.

Subjective

Local to who, Germany?

Please show your fiancée this thread so she knows who she is marrying and has a true choice if she is not aware of this side of you already. screenshot saved just in case

And you apparently do as well.

If by Zionism, you mean simply a homeland for Jews, who here besides you is defying it? I am not going to engage with anything else that is conspiracy theories, but didn’t want you to think this was a forum that agreed with your claims against the Jews just because most of us are too polite to engage…plus there is the rule of no politics. You will likely get banned as I believe you were the first time you came here if you are the poster I think you are (I think your account was blocked as I can’t find the post I remember to check). If you want to stick to talking about Catholicism, Christianity, or your criticism of our LDS Christian beliefs and history in a respectful way, you are welcomed to post, but disrespect and worse gets one banned thankfully.

Is this you? https://m.fanfiction.net/u/16874415/OrangeNero

Neither am I. Nor should any LDS be. Is there a reason you mention this in the context of a discussion about the certainty of certain LDS beliefs? Just curious.

What name do you go by, is it Stephan?

I think I mixed up this ‘Dario’ with Dario M. Both are European and I wasn’t reading close enough to get the country and other details as I popped in during a short break between phone errands. I did a search on members and we have 3 Dario’s listed, the other one was a DarioJelks and one Darion (member of the Church though). Stephan Dario, how common is Dario? This ‘Dario’ is German and the other was living in the Netherlands and Portugal when he was posting in the board. I can’t remember if the Netherlands was his birthplace or not.

Isn’t being certain that certainty is a sin or even just wrong contradictory with holding a position of incertitude? ” I have no certainty on what criteria Christ will base his judgment about the eternal destiny of those who appear before Him. ” Are you not certain LDS are wrong in their beliefs about ordinances and authority being required by God as part of our covenant to enter back into his presence? Neither do we. In the end it will be those who want to be of the family of God (those exalted will be of the Church of the Firstborn, the Restored Church is merely a mortal vehicle as should be obvious from the inclusion of “Latter-day” in the name since eternity has no “latter days”, only mortality) and those that don’t. “The faithful saints were made members of the Church of the Firstborn in eternity, since they receive through Jesus Christ the inheritance of the firstborn (D&C 93:21–22).” https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures/bd/firstborn?lang=eng

You don’t seem to care about objections (in the sense of adapting your preferred approach) from any trans advocacy group, so not seeing why you bring this up for others’ POV as if it’s a weakness.

Looks like Dario has stored up some ideas since last he posted, but is having a problem starting anew thread even in Social, so here’s one for him. Added: probably not Dario M.

Nvm,

Someone needs to show me solid documentation, not just anecdotes or worse, speculation that I will not only be safer, but feel safer when I see this man come into a restroom I am currently using, because I know how I will react when I see him walk in and am pretty confident how the vast majority of women will react as well (both in negative ‘what the hell is this guy doing in the restroom’ and positive ‘wow, he is gorgeous’ versions, which may happen at the same time). Because on the level I am interacting with him, he is a man no matter what his biology is. I will only be reacting to him as a man as I won’t have the time or inclination to have a discussion with him about his chromosomes when my purpose is to become more physically comfortable and then clean up and then leave the premises as fast as possible (the hard surfaces of a bathroom create a very uncomfortable environment for me, I don’t like even being in my home bathrooms for the same reasons). Now if I was participating in a discussion about the ideology, biology, politics or something else around transitioning, I likely would use “them” and “they” and “biological female” for accuracy to describe him, but during any casual interaction and perhaps brief verbal conversation, in my head and gut I am going straight to “him” and “man” without a second thought. And it is a guaranteed fact that I would either walk out feeling rather offended and fearful because this guy thought he had a right to ignore the social rules and intrude on my privacy and how screwed up he must be to do that, increasing my sense of vulnerability and exposure by his unjustified use of my space (because that’s how I have always felt when it happens, which it has only once or twice in my life without an explanation of intense need and an apology) or I would be walking out feeling very awkward and embarrassed that I had forced them to share with me their medical and social background I did not need to know out of their concern for my few minutes at most discomfort. And then I would be left uncomfortably wondering how often this was going to be happening in the future, someone who is a man in all ways that they interact with me being forced by law to awkwardly and unfortunately share secluded, but still public space with me based on a law that ignored practical realities…and knowing me, my use of public restrooms would drop way low not because I felt unsafe with them, but because I wouldn’t want them to feel unsafe with me and I know I am too old and too programmed at this point not to react with fear on my face and body language if I see someone who is obviously a man (as far as I can tell) walk into the restroom for some reason without a custodian uniform on. Seriously, looking at pictures like this I find it so hard to believe that biologically this person is female. My gut would never be convinced, my emotional reaction to them will always be “he’s male”.

Men have attacked women in restrooms in the past not because they can walk in unquestioned by others when there are multiple women using it, but because they typically wait until there is one woman alone within. Thus any law barring any biological male from entering a women’s restroom will be highly unlikely to affect these types of attacks, imo.

I think you forgot to add “and are good people at heart” because someone can be poor and a **** and get money and still be a ****…I don’t see you liking them for their consistency, lol.

I thought the Church was self insured for such things, which is one reason they are strict on how the kitchen is used and the no fire, no candles, no hay at Halloween rules.

A correction….They believe they experience life as a woman. Since they cannot perceive what the inner world of a woman is like and how we in general react to the world, much of what they believe is based on assumptions. For example, I suspect they don’t approach life planning events and appointments around their monthly cycle only to be screwed up by it coming early or late. They may have fear due to being weaker and more vulnerable for a variety of reasons than most males, but they probably lack the cultural and social experIence that has come from eons of male dominance over females. I have some experience with trying to live in the pecking order that exists among girls, but I could easily see that was different than the social dominance structures my son got to deal with, so not saying males have no cultural experience with male dominance and hierarchy, just saying it’s very different than the female-male version even if we share the fundamental experience of fear and shame that too often it results in. Having said that, I have learned my assumptions of what it means to experience life as a woman can at times be dramatically different from another woman’s POV and my sense of what a woman needs to be includes so much less than a lot of others…for me, it’s a few biological realities and not much more. Even with those, variation can be massive. There are women whose lives merely add an additional minor monthly adjustment for cleanliness for a few days while others lose half a month or more of “normal life” to the beast that is their cycle. The fact that we as a biological sex are so varied makes it easier to understand why there may be those who do not experience those few biological realities, but still see themselves as women because they share other aspects of many women’s existence even if it frustrates me that we as a society are still so locked into gender roles that so many who are not biologically women still define themselves that way, which to me strengthens the box women in general are often forced into by their upbringing rather than destroying the boxes our culture has come up with to truly allow for recognition of individual expressions of being. (I am not sure if the preceding makes sense; I see it as similar to some women choosing to seek after being able to receive the same priesthood as men currently get, defining our potential by what men now have rather than expecting there may be something different waiting for us or that we already have we must learn to recognize.)