ZealouslyStriving

Since you made it political... No one is trying to remove people from our country for being "brown", they are being removed for entering our country illegally- whether they are brown, black, yellow, or even... white.

In the sense that He lived here as a mortal man, and is coming again as immortal King... yes. However, I believe your real question is: Will He visit all of His vast creation? Now that is a deep question, that I'm sure will engender varying ideas.

Hmmm.... Off the top of my head: Eve Sarah Rebecca Rachel Leah Samson's Mother Deborah Zipporah Miriam Ruth Esther Naomi Mary (mother of Jesus) Elizabeth Mary Magadelene Mary & Martha Dorcas Sarah Ammonite Mothers Emma Smith Vienna Jaques ** But sure we'll go with the "trend in scripture" of women not having the dignity of being acknowledged for their faithfulness and hard work. **

Are you referring to the verse quoted? Because in context, it is referring to those at the time of the flood, not the Sons of Perdition.

I'm fascinated by your implication that certitude concerning one's religion necessarily entails the scorning of other beliefs. Perhaps I am reading that sentence wrong, but it seems to be the implications based on the context of your overall post.

Can't find it this second, but I'm pretty sure Church leaders have counseled parents not to pressure or bribe their lukewarm kids into serving missions hoping they will gain a testimony. If your parents did that, it was your family and/or community culture, not Church counsel.

I was like "Stand by Me"?! But then I went and looked it up, it's nice really.

It's interesting how a person's unique, individual family experience sets a precedent in their mind for how the whole Church functions. Sociologically fascinating really.

If they do here is there any reason to believe they don't there? Perhaps, you are reading the verse a little too literally. 🤷🏻‍♂️

I am "taking that route" because she keeps mischaracterizing Charlie as "racist, racist, and misogynist" yet refuses to watch anything from the very people she says Charlie attacked defending him. She is disingenuous. "Moron" is mild compared what she is calling him. He used facts and stats all the time, but I shouldn't be surprised you refuse to see it.

https://www.facebook.com/share/v/1EHu8UqALR/

Fin.

You are an utter moron. The foxes have taken over this henhouse. I'm done.

https://www.facebook.com/share/v/1Fa5sYEmie/

Final post https://www.facebook.com/share/v/19uwUtEPdd/

This place is impossible! Are you seriously not seeing the reactions happening about his assassination? He was making a huge impact with the youth. Calm, I am truly sorry, but in your efforts to satisfy both sides you have lost the plot. I think I need a break from this place for awhile.

You are seriously going to sit here and say that there isn't an aggressive liberal bias on American University and College campuses??? No point even interacting with you.

Indoctrinate U - Wikipedia https://share.google/wdqwdVwxFmPaDnWV1

The liberal bias at our Universities and Colleges has been thoroughly documented- so miss me with all that.

Charlie the "racist" https://www.facebook.com/share/r/17FEouaeK1/

Charlie debating "adults":

I can assure you the LGBTQ+ folks here do not speak for the whole. There have been many that actually knew Charlie and have expressed what a kind person he was.

You really don't get it do you? Many of these college aged young adults, the malleable "kids" you speak of had been molded by liberals filling the ranks of our collegiate educational system, after leaving their home environments and then kept on campuses that told them to keep any contrary opinions to themselves. Charlie went to simply debate them and show them that maybe what their professors were telling them wasn't the truth and that it is OK to express a contrary opinion and do so with facts. And he allowed professors come to the mic and debate him also, so they could try to prove to their students that Charlie was wrong. The outcome wasn't different, because they were the ones giving those "kids" the ideas Charlie was countering. So it was OK that liberal professors have a captive audience to shape malleable minds, but when a Conservative invites people, of their freewill, to debate him, and tries to show them that maybe what they're being taught isn't correct, that is somehow an issue? I don't get you.

I still have an affinity for "Mormon". If I am identifying the Church, I'll use the full name. Example: Q: What Church do you belong to? A: The COJCLDS but... Q: Are you a Mormon? A: Yes! but... Q: Are you a member of the Mormon Church? A: You mean the COJCLDS? Yes! ** I retain the right to proudly identify as "Mormon" where appropriate, and not obnoxiously correct people when it's not necessary.**

Maybe you have chosen to avoid politics and didn't have any idea what has been going on- so I will grant grace as to your not understanding why. Charlie Kirk was incredibly popular, basically on JFK status with conservatives, and his star was growing. He was changing young hearts, even on college campuses, where conservative opinions have essentially been banned. He would've been THE face of conservatism. A hero was taken from them, they are not going to let this go lightly. They are not playing around. I don't know if you're on YouTube or Facebook, and based on your commentary here it probably wouldn't be in your algorithm, but people are pissed. People who have tried to let bygones be bygones are through playing nice. The atmosphere changed on Sept. 10th. Intelligent Democrats know it- that is why they are running to the cameras, talking about stopping political violence. They know what this has unleashed, and they're scared.