Calm

Have you met people who state this is what they are doing? Or just heard about them? Knowing a few people who have gotten benefits for kids with disabilities as well as fostering, the help from the government has never covered all the costs they have, let alone the time and energy they put into caring for their kids. Also knew a lot of families who used WIC when I was newly married in the 80s. It never covered all needs. Given the cost of living these days, I just don’t see how it’s any easier now than when I knew these families 30, 20 years ago. If someone thinks they are going to have an easier life by having kids, they are in for a rude awakening. Canada was better in providing support while we were there, but still not that great of quality of life if that was the major source of income. Am very interested (sincerely curious as this is out of my realm of experience) to hear them as the only ones that come close that I have come across are satire or protest songs that reject those claims. Do you have some titles?

His family is obviously struggling. It was kind of them not to leave watchers hanging.

Breast augmentations don’t affect reproduction, so not sure what your comment has to do with my point. Women can even breast feed with them.

It is a great description of what is going on, imo. I second this. How much attention is the video actually getting? Added: went and looked...47,000 views and 2000+ comments. The comments seem excessive, I have no clue if the views are noteworthy for this kind of thing

I did the research on this as well and had noted the significantly less regret with gender affirming surgery over other permanent similar (in terms of medical procedures). I do find it rather hypocritical if lawmakers push for limits on gender affirming treatments for minors claiming they are doing so because of the medically invasive, permanent changes that the minors may regret later in their life while ignoring cosmetic surgeries for minors that result in pretty much the same medical outcomes especially given there is a greater dissatisfaction/regret rate for the latter. If it’s about stopping minors from making life altering decisions they will regret later, then cosmetic surgeries done to affirm the gender that matches their biological sex should also be included in any bans. I actually tend to lean towards surgical bans except in extreme cases given my own personal experience with aftercare of several different surgeries as well as seeing how teens with medical issues, acute and chronic, are often into heavy denial or ignore their own needs…I have my doubts most teens will comprehend sufficiently beforehand what the immediate results will be like including looks, which aren’t always that great (and that initial impression may lower overall satisfaction because that could forever color their view of the results). And then there is the basic additional self care required after surgery when teens aren’t known for healthy behaviours even when life is uncomplicated, so delaying it a few years until they will have better followthrough as well as bodies that are more fully developed so any shaping won’t get outdated or off balanced due significant changes in body fat, height, etc. I also think anyone, adult or minor, who wants to get a breast augmentation should be required to wear a bra that has the equivalent added weight and shape of their planned choice for at least a month so they know how it will affect their posture, how clothes fit, etc. Almost every one of my roommates in college and then some would express to me how jealous they were of me and I would tell them they didn’t know how good they had it as I was having back pain and headaches even then when I was pretty fit from the additional top weight. They obviously didn’t believe me. I get that a couple of lbs extra weight doesn’t seem like it would make much difference, but placement matters. Augmentations in general are apparently dropping down in size as women are going for a more holistic, balanced look. Given the significant physical inconveniences of larger breasts, that’s a very smart trend imo.

But that’s not what I mean. I think everyone pretty much assumes their faith belief applies to everyone in the world. Don’t you? You don’t believe there are actually a different beings who is God for Hindus like you believe there is God the Father and Christ, correct? Don’t you believe if anyone in the world is saved in the hereafter, they must accept Christ as their savior (whatever that means to you)? A Buddhist won’t achieve Nirvana just because they believe in that and a Hindu will be reincarnated until liberation and uniting with Brahman? But that is a very different topic than what I was talking about. I am only talking about how we communicate with each other, not our world views. To avoid communication misunderstandings, we should try and use a common language, which means avoid less universal definitions. I am essentially saying if you speak English at home, that’s no big deal even if you are living Spain or China. Your family who all speak English understand you, no one is being left out or confused by it. But if you leave the house and go to work and refuse to talk anything but English there with your coworkers who only know a little English, but speak the country’s common language fluently and the company is Spanish or Chinese, people would think you were troublesome or odd to refuse to even try and speak the language everyone else around them is speaking. You might luck out and find someone who speaks English to work with you short term , but in the long run, your work day will go much smoother with much less mistakes and obstacles if you have taken the time to learn and use the language everyone else is using. By accepting that it makes sense to speak Spanish in Spain with the Spanish and Chinese in China with the Chinese while speaking English at home with your American? Canadian? English speaking family, I am not saying that in the end everyone will have to speak English because it’s the only correct language. Iow, what I am saying in respect to our different faiths, is when we are with those who speak our own faith language, it doesn’t matter what definitions we use because everyone will use the same in our group. But when we interact with other faith groups we need to use the words that are most universal to explain our more individual beliefs. I shouldn’t use “salvation” and just assume a Protestant or Catholic will understand which version I am talking about by the context as I likely can with fellow Saints. I need to use more common terms or go into detail until I am certain someone understands what I mean. For example, if I tell someone they need to be baptized as a sign of faith and obedience to Christ, I can’t just stop there because they may assume any form of baptism would be accepted by LDS. I need to state instead something like ‘we believe the Restored Gospel—one of the correct and preferred names of our faith—teaches that baptism by immersion by someone who has been given authority by God, namely a priesthood holder in our LDS faith, is required by God ‘. Hopefully that communicates to anyone (though they need to be familiar with what priesthood and immersion are) what we mean when we say among ourselves “baptism is one of the first principles and ordinances of the Gospel”. I am not saying be dishonest by claiming to believe something we don’t by accepting others’ definitions, I am saying explain our own beliefs by using common, universal definitions so everyone is more likely to understand our beliefs like we understand them so they can then decide what they think about our beliefs and talk about them with us effectively. It can get very frustrating when people think we believe something we don’t. This can occur not only because someone else has misrepresented our beliefs, but because we weren’t careful enough in what ways we chose to explain our beliefs or even just assumed people understood.

For those who want to attend her funeral: There will be a viewing Sunday, January 18, from 5 to 7 pm. There will be a viewing Monday, January 19, at 10:00 am, followed by the funeral at 11:00. These will take place at a stake center at 5176 W Parr Dr in West Jordan.

So it is pretty much ‘what shall they do which are baptized for Christ’? And this means what to you exactly?

Of course not. It doesn’t make sense to do so (justify something you believe in by supporting it with something you do not). It would be like claiming America was the best country in the world by pointing out all the wonderful things Russia was doing.

I really wish stats didn’t use 12-18, but 12-17. It makes no sense to include 18 when 18 is considered a legal adult and not a child, imo. There are 3 states that have older legal age, but still seems to make more sense to go with the majority. I say this because looking up one set of stats for genital surgery gives me 15-18, which means we can’t know how many, if any were actually performed on children. Did find another for 15-17 which gave a total of 56 over three years (2019-2021), so they were happening, if rare (this was insurance claims, so those willing to pay out of pocket might not be included, but seems like given the expense, that would add very few). Would really like to know why they were allowed to go ahead and not wait a couple of years, if only because the doctors were concerned about liability (much more likely to get sued for malpractice with children…or were last time I looked it up, it’s one reason why there are fewer pediatric specialists). The only thing I can think of is puberty blockers couldn’t be used. I wonder given the additional attention the last few years if this stat has stayed the same, increased or decreased. https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-transyouth-data/?utm_source=chatgpt.com

Meaning short or long? Do you think it’s likely? Just curious. Also curious….even if sweeping, this can be overturned in the future is there’s a pertinent case and the judges lean differently, just as Roe vs Wade was overturned. Uphill battle of course once a decision has been made and set a precedent, but it’s not guaranteed to not be revisited, correct? I like the idea of not having to worry about laws changing, to be able to know where we stand in terms of what’s legal and what’s not (I remember the confusion of law students when we lived in Moscow in 95 where they were complaining they had to dump old textbooks and buy new ones each semester law was being changed around so much plus what good was memorizing anything). But I also highly approve of laws being revisited from time to time to ensure they are the best for the people they govern. Humans being involved, even the best we can currently do should be improved upon when we can and there are plenty of laws that are not the best we can do.

Brilliant. We are train fans in our family, but I have never been able to be on a real train outside of the Heber Creeper (a short train ride mainly for kids, my son loved Thomas the Tank when he was young), just rapid transit. Always wanted to do the overnight, dining car experience. Agatha Christie used trains a lot in her plots and I inhaled her books when young (and now have all her mysteries).

Never, just through FAIR. She was a hard worker, compassionate and understanding, articulate and well informed, but never came across as arrogant to me.

Would you view it as rape if it was emotional pressure on the level of “if you love me, you will….”? (Not challenge, serious question, I don’t know if usage has changed) Not being dismissive of how inappropriate and selfish and wrong that tactic is, I just have a very hard time with lumping that in with physical restraint and assault. I would prefer different labels so as the latter doesn’t lose its horror like some terms have that have broaden their application.

Yes, imo, in certain areas. Speaking of personal relationships with Christ is one of them. I think people are more relaxed about it now than after Elder McConkie raised his concerns. https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/2025/10/52cuvelier?lang=eng But remember not everyone saw things the same way even back then or maybe it was the inferences Elder McConkie drew from the phrase that were the problem, a certain way of seeing one’s relationship to Christ that led to some extreme behaviour due to a popular book taken too far imo rather than any type of personal relationships with Christ. Mentioned in your link…. https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/ensign/1976/11/a-personal-relationship-with-the-savior?lang=eng

You have a good point. I was more focused on directors who fought editing of movies for younger audiences or those who preferred ‘cleaner’ cuts as interfering with artistic property rights. I was also thinking of how the Grinch was used in a commercial I saw back when the movie came out that in essence shared the message the book (and hopefully movie) conveyed, but then added “but just in case the Grinch was wrong”…to promote shopping and buying lots of gifts. I don’t think Dr. Seuss would have approved of the image of the Grinch being used for that commercial…at least I hope not. No doubt his estate didn’t care since they sold the rights allowing that kind of stuff. I think there are very good arguments on both sides (bad ones as well )

I am very upset about this. She was a wonderful person. I don’t know anything about her family, I hope they are doing okay. https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/blog/2026/01/12/in-memoriam-sarah-allen

That both works well enough that risk is low and people in charge and/or in general have been willing to pay for…. Free birth control helps, for example. But of course it can’t solve the problem on its own. And since one type of birth control is both free and accessible to all (abstinence), some people think it’s not fair to have to pay for others’ pleasure, sex is not seen as a right (which it isn’t, but some things should be subsidized just because it makes sense, imo, like health and public transportation). Kind of short sighted imo since birth control is tons cheaper than paying for the unplanned kids later and much better than abortion. No one solution works on its own and it takes time and consistency and figuring out what combo works, something government in the US doesn’t invest in well, imo. ***Abstinence is not available to all either as some will have partners.that force them and then there are rapists, but I am speaking generally here. Then there are those who even with free birth control won’t plan ahead (teens too nervous to ask for it, adults who miscalculate, etc), but still free birth control drops a lot of unplanned pregnancies for unmarried and low income families if made easily accessible (free but hard to get isn’t much better than not free imo).

Given each culture approaches death differently I am not sure what the natural grieving process is unless it’s waking up in the cave or hut and having to bury the dead that didn’t make it through the night. Even back then they were burying loved ones with little treasures though. There are some cultures that treat their dead loved ones as almost alive as their living ones with shrines in homes, etc. I do think AI representations with new material….such as inserting dead actors into new films or commercials is going too far. Part of it is the issue of consent…but then some people see our baptisms of the dead in the same way. Iow, it’s a complicated, confusing mess like most things about human relationships.

Anyone taking any type of authority to interpret doctrine for the Church without being called to it and given the authority is in dangerous territory. Expressing one’s opinion, teaching scholarship is fine…insisting what the Church has chosen to use as its standard is wrong and publicizing that position is problematic. added: not saying it’s inherently immoral or sinful to publicly oppose Church policy, it might even be the better way in some rare cases (I am not going to judge everyone arrogant, looking for fame and/or profit, etc. because I can’t know what efforts, if any, to bring problems to the attention of leaders have occurred before going public with some)…just be prepared for the consequences and don’t act like it’s unexpected. The Church has been wrong with its policies on some occasions imo, but the Church also has a right imo to dictate its own correction process and what is and isn’t apostasy.

I hate how AI is being used in way too many fields. It’s pretty dang fantastic for the good stuff it can do, such as speeding up medical research. Like any extraordinarily powerful tool, it needs to be used with caution and unfortunately that’s not obvious to some people or they just don’t care.

Would you believe a practice that Buddhists are doing should inform Christian behaviour? Burning incense in Buddhism may be done to get rid of bad karma. Would it make sense for a Christian apologist who was supporting using incense in Christian rituals to use the Buddhist example to explain why Christians burn incense? Buddhist also use chanting, have monastic orders, sacred places, etc. Their ultimate goal is nirvana. Does it make sense to use their practices to justify similar practices in Christianity when the ultimate purpose is fundamentally different?

Interesting… ”He says he doesn't want to limit himself to temples in Utah.” There’s only 22 operating in Utah anyway. But he may make enough money off his videos that he can cover travel costs….at least he can deduct them as a business expense. Otherwise could be a financial strain to try and squeeze them into a year.

Never heard of him, what’s his thing? I asked Chat how many operating temples there are in Utah and a half day’s drive. It came up with 53, so not that big of an effort if he’s not going for a major tour, but over weekends.

That’s why I was thinking money would help. Pay someone who knew how to fine tune it.