Jump to content

juliann

Contributor
  • Posts

    14,882
  • Joined

Everything posted by juliann

  1. Mansplain much? You admit you know nothing about feminist groups, not even enough to know that there is a push for lesbians to dissasociate themselves from the T because they are being told them must accept biological males as lesbians? If you are unaware of the violence against anyone labeled TERF (and merely disagreeing with anything said by trans activists gets you that label), you have no standing in this discussion. Google it. The slurs and threats against women are too vile for me to post a link to them. And I stand behind my statement that these feminists receive the violence, they don't give it. Nice try trying to change that to "transphobes" to sidestep the fact that most violence is going to come from male transphobes. Just for fun, how many public campaigns have there been to get transgendered people fired? Cause there have been a lot of women who say things like sex is biological who have been fired or forced to resign. And as always, I have to add the obligatory disclaimer, my concern is with the trans activists that seem to control the public discourse, not the majority who transition and only want to co-exist, as they should be able to. Also, stop changing my words.
  2. Wow, I've followed a particular woman's group for years. They are the only ones fighting for women and that defines who they align with...not partisan politics. I deeply respect them and their sacrifices since the liberal women's groups abandoned women some time ago. You are really ignorant when it comes to women's groups. BTW, "terfs" are on the receiving end of violence not the giving end. Those who want to shut down women have burned down lesbian libraries, physically attacked women if they attempt to gather, and have successfully gone after their jobs. So be honest when it comes to blame.
  3. Since we are herd animals, I think this depends on what ward you are in. I have heard horrific stuff and there has been times where it is nothing but a parade of sermons and self serving stories. The ones I hate the most are what I call the Speshalmonies, stories about how God intervened in their lives by healing them, finding a perfect job for them, something they lost, blah blah when there are people in the audience who have had children die. That is why I name testimonies, travelmonies, sermonies, etc.
  4. Then why were you making an issue of my saying two scholars? Now you are merely splitting hairs. Of course going to a liberal school of religion is considered "outside" information. I received a couple of warnings about apostacy back in the day and my field was NT (meaning, Bible.) Have you studied at a liberal school of religion? The Bible is probably the best defense for Mormon theology that exists. Most religions can neatly tie into Christian history at some point, Mormonism is no exception. But, since the Bible is a mixed bag, there will always be those who will create their own Bible within the Bible to exclude everything else. Thus, my concern would be someone attending a Christian Bible college Do you think anyone on a message board is unfamiliar with critics? You tried to do this by excluding those who have studied the Bible and retained if not strengthened their testimonies by throwing up a few anecdotes and claiming victory without acknowledging the many more scholars who did just fine with it. What the heck do you think is in the Bible...or liberal schools...that defies Mormonism more than any other religion?
  5. Um, do you not consider BYU professors scholars?? Maybe names would be important? Like I said...a couple of scholars... And yes, it is dopey. There was some eagerness to get students into outside colleges. BYU hired one of the CGU grads that was there when I was. There will always be holdovers from another era when there was fear of getting outside information but you don't give enough context and only offer selected anecdotes that suit your narrative.
  6. And yet Claremont Graduate University initiated their Mormon Studies program because of the Mormon students they had encountered. That would be a rather odd thing to do if all those students were nonbelievers. In general, it’s a really dopey thing to say that studying the Bible turns everyone into nonbelievers merely by naming a couple of scholars.
  7. And that culminated in her suing FAIR because of a spoof website. The first judge threw it out on summary judgment so she went to 10th Circuit. Where she lost resoundingly. She not only earned the admiration of all anti-Mormons, but also those like the Ralph Nadar organization who wanted the 10th Circuit to close the donut hole they lived in because of the lack of protection in their jurisdiction for what she thought she could get away with. So I am happy to report that Tanner not only has her name enshrined in anti-Mormonism, but also in case law that now protects citizens from predators like her.
  8. I wish we would add some of her thinking to the "covenant path." It adds much deeper meaning to something that has felt rather random to me. I was reading her books as they came out. She had a lot of critics then, but that is what happens in scholarship...although it's usually with younger scholars trying to find their footing by establishing new thinking, by discarding some of the old. I appreciated CGU's approach of including believers, her statement about Biblical studies discarding the only people who use the Bible quite telling.
  9. This is one of those parables that would have made sense to the people whose it was written for. There is also a corollary parable. There are underlying concepts we don't get in our day and age. I don't remember it all well enough to get into and it isn't important enough for me to research, but with explanation it does make sense. However, I have never heard of the wedding garment give away...I'd like some more references to that aside from "a Christian author."
  10. "The vast majority of murder-suicides are born out of desperation and depression, not devotion. They occur in the context of a controlling, yet emotionally dependent relationship that is threatened in some way and are, I suspect, committed by a partner who wants to end his or her own pain but who—deep down—can’t bear the thought of loved ones living happily without him." Wow, I'd never thought much about this unspeakable act...this makes a lot of sense when it comes to this mostly male violence event.
  11. I was able to get an introduction to Process Theology at Claremont. I was fascinated with it.
  12. Tyler said the streaming should be available for a short while. There have been some stunning presentations and the tech is stellar.
  13. Yes, it took me awhile to notice the wrinkle. That settles it for me. Plus, the death mask has those same deep eye sockets missing in the painting. The eyes and brows are quite different in the painting. With Emma's witness that the painting was not a good likeness, I think we have to go with the mask as the most accurate comparison. And I've always wondered why JS was always shown with an almost Hollywood boyish look which never seemed to match his ability to elicit such sacrifice from so many. The photo looks like a grown up who would be taken seriously, although he looks a bit haggard and tired which makes sense at that time.
  14. Uh, it would have shot down the speech and language program at a time where there is a shortage of therapists and programs. That is worth a lot. Which is why ASHA thinks it can get away with empty threats.
  15. Emma said the painting wasn't a good representation. The most compelling evidence is the pictures of Smith women descendants wearing the locket.
  16. Knock it off. Your scriptures had nothing to do with what I am talking about, 19th century polygamy and current beliefs. You are pretending that ancient scripture is the same thing without giving any support for that. Until you do, you have not provided any purpose for polygamy, only ancient stories in an era where it was unremarkable.
  17. If you are going to come in here and demand responses to personal questions, you do need to understand the culture and rules of this board. I'll try to make it simpler. You claimed that Pres. Hinckley's statement was not up to snuff because it was said in a TV interview. You now need to substantiate that he said something different to make your claim meaningful. You have now moved the goal posts to say he did mean it. Whether it was "doctrinal" then is irrelevant. It was, of course, treated as doctrine then. No one would have done it otherwise. But I have never made that an issue. My argument is with those who insist it is unchanging doctrine. And I have not been unclear about that. You won't do well here if you attempt to change the discussion whenever you are asked to document your assertions.
  18. If you are researching ancient texts, you research. And for solid research, you need the original language. You do it with methodology like critical source, text, literary, etc. criticism. You are merely cherry picking verses and pretending that is meaningful.
  19. You have not presented any research at all, you are only quoting scripture and providing your self-serving interpretations. Insulting people is not a substitute for knowledge of the topic.
  20. Are you serious? So the purpose of polygyny is to give men lots of offspring through sex slaves. Lovely. Now go research the topic of this thread.
  21. It's no secret the divorce rate in polygamy was high, Utah became an easy divorce state for the nation. That usually doesn't happen in happy marriages.
  22. You mean I’m emotional, eh. It’s only a matter of time before that starts… That is such a question begging summation it can’t be answered.
  23. You are an admitted fundamentalist. There are just as many negative accounts, probably far more, than positive. You seriously need to stop grasping at straws. It doesn’t work now that women’s diaries are being researched. Also, the divorce rate in polygamist marriages makes your claim specious.
  24. That is the 60,000 dollar question. What IS the benefit of polygamy? Eternally. What is the point? What possible spiritual benefit could there be for multiple wives or husbands? How does that make anyone more righteous than monogamy? The only possible reason would be is if there are left over men or women. I have asked this for over a decade. Crickets.
  25. None of your business. That is a faith based question which is against board rules. CFRs are your business. You do need to respond. You have brushed up the statement of a modern prophet as not being valid. Provide documentation for that rather than opinion. I'll tell you why that will be especially difficult, even though Pres. Hinckley said this in a TV interview, he mysteriously never, ever corrected it, if it was an error.
×
×
  • Create New...