Chum

You got me at Crime Writer. But then this: It's everything I could want in a Vulgate translator.

I can appreciate that perspective. For my part, I find the "forced {} into existence" difficult to reconcile with my worldview. My phrasing is admittedly pointed. But every way I tried to soften it, it wandered away from the reality that kids face. Which is that they had no say so in getting existed. I strongly believe we have no call to impose a debt on them for that; I feel it shifts the whole circumstance toward unethical territory.

The notion of "kids owing parents" is on the table somewhere here but I'm not ascribing it to you. I think you're maybe exploring the cave it happens to live in. And as long as we're here, I'd like to drag the notion into the sunlight and pummel it a bit.

The debt of using them to fulfill my own purpose and happiness. This works.

That's another interesting thought. What debt do you owe them? I don't know the name of my debt but I pay it by helping them achieve happiness. Secondarily, I strive to encourage my kids to help others achieve happiness (which enriches their world).

This is an interesting thought. Aren't we told that we chose to come to this earth and have a mortal probation? How then is any of us "forced {} into existence?" Even when I was active, I found this an extraordinarily insufficient reasoning. It seems like a super thin justification for imposing life impacting obligations on my kids - particularly obligations that all flow to me. There isn't anything in my experience that supports the notion (that my kids owe me because of the premortal existence).

To be clear, your sentiment is especially honorable. To address the OT sentiment, shouldn't there be a corresponding commandment - or at least shouldn't this one include the two-way obligation? I personally suspect that OT adults more comfortable (than I am) with seeing their children as material.

I've thought about this. But that part of the Gospel is tied to the non-existence of any memory of those events. The notion of holding one accountable to an agreement made in an existence that no one has 1st hand knowledge of - this seems problematic at best. Binding my own children to it doesn't feel at all like good parenting to me. Personally, it feels like leverage and exploitation.

I struggle with this. No child consents to anything, not to being born, not to being adopted, (in younger years) not to which parent gets custody, and so on. I have reconciled this in a way that seems to be driving the extraordinarily good relationship I have with (all 5 of) my sons. It is my choices that forced them into existence. They owe me nothing because non-existent beings are incapable of consenting to anything. I had all the power of consent and due to this extremely one-sided arrangement, I remain in their debt for the rest of my life. I reside in a permanent state of servitude to them. These are the defaults, our starting points. Respecting their consent builds abiding trust at a deep level. Consent is key to salvation, ethics, ability and love. It hangs out in the very best circles. The weight I place on consent flows from Church's teaching about Satan's premortal plan for us - which was based on a lack of consent and the resulting dearth of worthwhile redemption. Associating those two conditions with evil has changed my relationships with others, in ways that can be indescribably positive. Consent may outweigh even kindness in achieving our most valuable and fulfilling humanity. Plugging my parenting into all that has been ceaselessly good.

I used web apps to turn this into a transcript; I posted it here: https://justpaste.it/gz7x3 ftr: Raw MP3 file (gleaned from F12 Dev Tools), Podcast Transcription, Transcript Cleaner.

I agree. Another is Broken Things to Mend. For me, that talk came when my life was at a deep point in it's unraveling - but I hadn't yet realized there was no righteous thing I could do about it. 2010's priesthood sessions testified how life would improve in some relevant way (not instantly but eventually) if we just fulfilled our covenants. Holland's talks were balm when those improvements never came. There are many Church leaders I believe stood closer to Christ. Holland was the one I believed stood where we stood.

Tell us what you're going to do or what you did, depending on which side of the holiday you're on. Or just craft a barely legible cry for help. Include your phone number if you want a call with a feigned emergency. Today's plan was to drop a rumcake and a flavored pork roast at the in-laws today. sidebar: Huzzah to #5's first ever booze buy. First out of all his siblings, afaik. However the rum cake didn't work out so we punted to a homemade pizza and no roast. Then we couldn't coordinate schedules w/ the inlaws who are endlessly busy so eh. For Christmas day, me + adult sons #3,#4,#5 are here all day. #1 is working until mid afternoon. #2 moved to Philly and is living the sort of awesome life that just happens when you escape FL. #3 is tapping out a broken bolt from the block of the 92 Buick and installing the water pump assembly. Unless he gets it done today. I'm itchy w/o a couple of spare cars around. Maybe I'll dig out the 61 Sunliner tomorrow and guage it's road readiness. I'm gifting myself a larger bedroom tomorrow, given that #2 has moved out. I might work a bit remotely, migrate a camera system over to a box w/ an AI processor and play with that. We're all doing Chinese take-out when #1 gets home. past that. I'm toying with the idea of a daily music post here. It's a month of artists you've never heard of. I'm not sure where it would fall on the obnoxious <-> welcome scale tho. Oh and Speaking of the world's worst advent calendar: We're all finally over a week+ of crud where every day was a different symptom. Happy for that. Happy ever-lengthening days to you, yours, everyone and everyone else. And happy ever warming days to those of us still in FL. This was two hours ago.

As near as I can tell, Polygamy and Plural Marriage are fully interchangeable. Both mean marriage to more than one spouse and include Polygyny, Polyandry, Group Marriage. Judging it's use in Church publications, I suspect the Church wants us to assume Plural Marriage means Polygyny (1 man, multiple women).

Recalling my history with FS, I've seen a lot of hints that an amount of names are shared for temple work, without any interaction on a member's part. One indication was that the ID of the member who shared it would be missing.

Are 100% of names handed out in temples submitted by close family members? If Y, are we certain it's absolutely 100% ?