Gordon Posted February 20, 2012 Posted February 20, 2012 I think that when you read the full quotation the context is important. And context can often be ignore by critics when it doesn't fit their purposes. And this is a case in point. Also, the article linked was written in the early nineties. I think that the exlds must be the only ones to go back in time and cherry pick what a leader said to make a negative point even though as in this case, it is now 20 years ago. I find this to be amazing.People are in abusive situations for many reasons. And certainly men and women who are being abused must also take responsibility for the abuse if they decide not to leave. And I think that this is what he meant. Now if I were being abused and found myself trapped without realizing that I was trapped, what this GA said may help me realize it and to escape from my oppressive situation.I agree. As per the statement, there is a range of responsibility (accountability), from some to none...that's the context.
cdowis Posted February 20, 2012 Posted February 20, 2012 We just heard a few days ago of a member on this forum saying he would give up his wife to the Prophet if commanded to do so. No room for debate or even thinking.I think some people do not recognizing the difference between "getting marry" and "being sealed". JS was sealed to women who were married and continued in that marriage.
cdowis Posted February 20, 2012 Posted February 20, 2012 We just heard a few days ago of a member on this forum saying he would give up his wife to the Prophet if commanded to do so. No room for debate or even thinking.I think some people do not recognizing the difference between "getting marry" and "being sealed". JS was sealed to women who were married and continued in that marriage.
Deborah Posted February 20, 2012 Posted February 20, 2012 Wow, Deborah, you're one of the posters who I have agreed with on a consistent basis. In this instance, though, you're straining at a gnat.Sorry we don't agree on this point but I think it is an important distinction. One doesn't have to be accountable for an evil done to take steps to remedy it. A cop may take responsibility for stopping a robbery but he is not accountable for committing the robbery.
california boy Posted February 20, 2012 Posted February 20, 2012 I think some people do not recognizing the difference between "getting marry" and "being sealed". JS was sealed to women who were married and continued in that marriage.Just curious, what do you think the difference is between "getting marry" and "being sealed" and how does that better justify what JS asked married couples to do?
Gordon Posted February 27, 2012 Posted February 27, 2012 Sorry we don't agree on this point but I think it is an important distinction. One doesn't have to be accountable for an evil done to take steps to remedy it. A cop may take responsibility for stopping a robbery but he is not accountable for committing the robbery.We do disagree, because the cop isn't "responsible" for the robbery, itself, but for the stopping of it. Those are two different things. A person may be responsible for recognizing that they need to get out of a bad situation ( a parent versus a child), if possible, and held accountable for not doing so. They go hand in hand. If someone is responsible for an evil done, in any way, they will be held accountable for that in a similar manner. The cop wouldn't be held accountable for the robbery, because he wasn't responsible for the robbery, itself.I still enjoy your posts, though.
Recommended Posts