Pres. Uchtdorf'S Priesthood Talk About Diversity

[Darren10]

The sooner you accept that this is reality not a notion the sooner you'll realise the folly of that silly Independence Day celebration and come back, cap in hand to your, clearly superior, European masters

Heh!!! What can I say? I'm a jingoist at heart.

Now where are dem' d'ere faayyrewerks???

Edited April 15, 2013 by Darren10

[CV75]

That was not the only thing he stated, however.

If you were to be judged by only the first post in any discussion you were in, don't you think there might be many cases of misunderstanding of your intentions?

I did continue my post with saying, "The original remark about the Amish aside..." addressing the significance of the subsequent posts about the Amish.

But since this was only used to emphasize the egregiousness of the Cleavers, the American TV family certainly has changed over the decades, following the public’s perception of what a family is, its values about the family and what passes as popular, money-making entertainment. But why should the Lord’s standard for what constitutes a family change? At the same time, the Lord has a consistent standard for the individual saint who does not have a family.

From what I understand, the Lord’s standard for a family involves the sealing keys and the spirit of Elijah. The Cleavers didn’t portray these. But it has also been noted from the pulpit that the values of our society (which would come across in popular media) and the Lord’s standards have been moving further and further apart for decades. Did the Cleavers reflect some of the Lord’s standards better than the more current TV families that are more “relate-able” to modern tastes?

I’m not referring to the morality lessons that are either the primary message or get thrown in for redeeming value (or something in between), but the Article of Faith 13 or Proclamation on the Family aspects that come across in how family life and values are portrayed. I don’t watch much TV, so I’m putting the question out there to those that do.

In either case, can anyone recall the Church holding up a particular TV family as an example to follow, much less a TV family of yesteryear? I think that charge is levied by those sufficiently steeped in popular media culture to want to formulate that kind of connection.

And if we’re comparing how things were against how things are, I think our Church leaders have made reference to this only in terms of morality and the world’s spiritual condition, which does play out in all facets of society. When talking about the truth, they need to talk about things as they ere, are and are to come. I don’t see them promoting an old-fashioned cultural system so much as the more eternal doctrines, covenants and ordinances of the Gospel.

[thesometimesaint]

Life expectancy is lower, sir, despite the horrific American diet. Retirement is banrupting the entire continent. In the US we mandate all get educated. In Europe children are filtered through qualifications in order to go through the schools. Regardless, you don't have to convince me that the American education system needs some big overhauling. Can't argue against the lower murder rate. And yes, regarding quality of living, I'd definitely want ot live in Europe than in many other places in the world.

The retirement system is bankrupting the US. What is bankrupting it is politicians "borrowing" money from it and not wanting to pay it back.

[cdowis]

Another case of cultural tolerance == wrapped in plastic while flying.

"This has nothing to do with women,” Reddit user thenewyorkgod wrote. “He is a cohen,’ descendant from the high holy priests of the temple and they are not allowed to walk into or fly over a cemetery, which would render them impure.”

Edited April 15, 2013 by cdowis

[Bikeemikey]

Life expectancy is lower, sir, despite the horrific American diet.

Hey there Darren, Sir,

CFR please on life expectancy.

Here are a few of my sources including an excellent WHO research paper on this very issue. Health Adjusted Life Expectancy is the current model for measuring life expectancy.

http://www.who.int/h...nfo/paper38.pdf (Pg 41 has a very good world map with the international performance comparisons).

http://www.who.int/h...ics/indhale/en/ (Basic over view of HALE - current most used mechanism for life expectancy comparison.

http://www.photius.c...ife_table2.html (Not a great website but mirrors the data with USA ranked 24th globally.)

This is the stats from the CIA website on direct life expectancy comparison with out the health adjusted bench mark.

https://www.cia.gov/...r/2102rank.html (Here the US performs worse at 51st on the list).

http://en.wikipedia....life_expectancy (Even wikipedia would disagree with your life expectancy claim).

http://andrewgelman....ealthcare_spen/ (This link shows the more interesting relationship between healthcare expenditure per person and life expectancy. The US outspends between 2 to 1 and 3 to 1 other first world nations for lower results).

http://www.nationalc...tiveHealth.html (This is a link that proposes an argument that measures such as life expectancy really tell us little about the value of health care. This argument is much weaker against the HALE measure than the more generic measure of plain old life expectancy. It is also not widely regarded as an argument.)

All of these say the USA underperforms against European countries, please share your sources.

Edited April 15, 2013 by Bikeemikey

[Bikeemikey]

Retirement is banrupting the entire continent.

In the US we mandate all get educated. In Europe children are filtered through qualifications in order to go through the schools. Regardless, you don't have to convince me that the American education system needs some big overhauling.

I am responding to two different points you have made.

On the first. You may be correct... it seems however your assessment may be a little bit of an oversimplification.

Onto education... I really have no idea what you mean as per the "mandated" US education vs. European "filtered" education. Please provide CFR and clarification.

http://www.census.gov/prod/2011pubs/acs-14.pdf (Current condition of US education).

http://www.oecd.org/education/skills-beyond-school/48631582.pdf (Please review page 30 of this report. The US on a whole performs at the OECD average for tertiary graduation rates, though slightly below for actual testing performance and skill bench marks. The major concern is that the number of graduates entering the workforce is the same as the number of graduates leaving the workforce. In most other OECD countries the number of graduates entering the workforce is substantially higher than the number of graduates leaving. This suggests the likelihood of other OECD nations being in a position to outcompete the USA not just in labor but also in innovation over the next few decades.)

http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2011/2011033.pdf (USA expanded report on the condition of education.)

http://www.oecd.org/pisa/46643496.pdf (US is right on average for OECD education.)

http://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisaproducts/pisa2009keyfindings.htm (These guys are the world leaders in education benchmarking evaluation.)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2010/dec/07/world-education-rankings-maths-science-reading (This one has pictures and says the US is still average in OECD performance.)

Comparison of performance to spending.

http://rossieronline.usc.edu/u-s-education-versus-the-world-infographic/ (Says we suck)

http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SE.XPD.TERT.PC.ZS (This one says we not doing well either)

http://mercatus.org/publication/k-12-spending-student-oecd (Looks like this one is not good news either.)

[Stone holm]

I am responding to two different points you have made.

On the first. You may be correct... it seems however your assessment may be a little bit of an oversimplification.

Onto education... I really have no idea what you mean as per the "mandated" US education vs. European "filtered" education. Please provide CFR and clarification.

http://www.census.gov/prod/2011pubs/acs-14.pdf (Current condition of US education).

http://www.oecd.org/education/skills-beyond-school/48631582.pdf (Please review page 30 of this report. The US on a whole performs at the OECD average for tertiary graduation rates, though slightly below for actual testing performance and skill bench marks. The major concern is that the number of graduates entering the workforce is the same as the number of graduates leaving the workforce. In most other OECD countries the number of graduates entering the workforce is substantially higher than the number of graduates leaving. This suggests the likelihood of other OECD nations being in a position to outcompete the USA not just in labor but also in innovation over the next few decades.)

http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2011/2011033.pdf (USA expanded report on the condition of education.)

http://www.oecd.org/pisa/46643496.pdf (US is right on average for OECD education.)

http://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisaproducts/pisa2009keyfindings.htm (These guys are the world leaders in education benchmarking evaluation.)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2010/dec/07/world-education-rankings-maths-science-reading (This one has pictures and says the US is still average in OECD performance.)

Comparison of performance to spending.

http://rossieronline.usc.edu/u-s-education-versus-the-world-infographic/ (Says we suck)

http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SE.XPD.TERT.PC.ZS (This one says we not doing well either)

http://mercatus.org/publication/k-12-spending-student-oecd (Looks like this one is not good news either.)

Umh, you trying to confuse him with facts, Mike?

[canard78]

Can someone remind me what US retirement issues has to do with Elder Uchtdorf's talk? I might have lost the thread of the thread.

[Bikeemikey]

Can someone remind me what US retirement issues has to do with Elder Uchtdorf's talk? I might have lost the thread of the thread.

Well... it sure has "diversified" the original thread :-)

Edited April 16, 2013 by Bikeemikey

[Stone holm]

Well I think originally I was trying to understand exactly what was involved in protecting the moral agency of mankind

[CASteinman]

Well I think originally I was trying to understand exactly what was involved in protecting the moral agency of mankind

I took it as relating to the support of democracy and the rule of law.

[Stone holm]

I took it as relating to the support of democracy and the rule of law.

Explain?

[CASteinman]

Explain?

I took it to mean that the Church supports those things (democracy and the rule of law) and does not coerce people into behaviors but encourages positive behaviors and teaches that local leaders, down to fathers in the home, do the same.

That is what I felt it was about. The role of the Church as a positive force in society in protecting the moral agency of "each of God's Children" (not just members of the Church).

I am not sure what sort of explanation I can give more than that -- it is what I thought it was about. I don't see how it can be about anything else. Because, after all, we have no executive, judicial, legislative or military power to exercise protection of this sort of thing. So, for people outside of the Church, we can only support those institutions that do have those powers and will exercise them in defending liberty. And for people inside the Church -- we mainly "teach them correct principles".

[Stone holm]

I took it to mean that the Church supports those things (democracy and the rule of law) and does not coerce people into behaviors but encourages positive behaviors and teaches that local leaders, down to fathers in the home, do the same.

That is what I felt it was about. The role of the Church as a positive force in society in protecting the moral agency of "each of God's Children" (not just members of the Church).

I am not sure what sort of explanation I can give more than that -- it is what I thought it was about. I don't see how it can be about anything else. Because, after all, we have no executive, judicial, legislative or military power to exercise protection of this sort of thing. So, for people outside of the Church, we can only support those institutions that do have those powers and will exercise them in defending liberty. And for people inside the Church -- we mainly "teach them correct principles".

Does not coerce behaviours ? Interesting, that is what I thought he was saying as well.

[CASteinman]

Does not coerce behaviours ? Interesting, that is what I thought he was saying as well.

But I think it was extended beyond that. To support of democratic governments and the rule of law. Because of the bit about "all of the Children of God".

[Stone holm]

But I think it was extended beyond that. To support of democratic governments and the rule of law. Because of the bit about "all of the Children of God".

Yeah I think it went a bit further to protect the individual's right of moral agency from coercion.

[CASteinman]

Yeah I think it went a bit further to protect the individual's right of moral agency from coercion.

I don't think it went quite that far. Laws do have a coercive effect.

[CASteinman]

Another case of cultural tolerance == wrapped in plastic while flying.

An amazing picture. I never saw such a thing. My thought upon seeing it was "Bravo for him for having the courage of his convictions". My second thought was: "How sad to be trapped in such an inconvenient apostasy"

[Bikeemikey]

I took it to mean that the Church supports those things (democracy and the rule of law) and does not coerce people into behaviors but encourages positive behaviors and teaches that local leaders, down to fathers in the home, do the same.

That is what I felt it was about. The role of the Church as a positive force in society in protecting the moral agency of "each of God's Children" (not just members of the Church).

I am not sure what sort of explanation I can give more than that -- it is what I thought it was about. I don't see how it can be about anything else. Because, after all, we have no executive, judicial, legislative or military power to exercise protection of this sort of thing. So, for people outside of the Church, we can only support those institutions that do have those powers and will exercise them in defending liberty. And for people inside the Church -- we mainly "teach them correct principles".

I agree with this 100% ... And would like govt to emulate this model of limited coercion on all moral issues not related to harm and consent.

Edited April 18, 2013 by Bikeemikey

[CASteinman]

I agree with this 100% ... And would like govt to emulate this model of limited coercion on all moral issues not related to harm and consent.

Government -- having power -- must execute it.

And ... Government, not being led by a Prophet but subject to the demands of the people -- cannot effectively "teach correct principles" in terms of moral behavior.

So, its not really a match for emulation.

The people must control and force the government to be in subjection to goodness. It is not the natural state.

It gets harder when the people are also not subject to goodness.

[Stone holm]

Government -- having power -- must execute it.

And ... Government, not being led by a Prophet but subject to the demands of the people -- cannot effectively "teach correct principles" in terms of moral behavior.

So, its not really a match for emulation.

The people must control and force the government to be in subjection to goodness. It is not the natural state.

It gets harder when the people are also not subject to goodness.

Actually the theory was that all you need for a free society is extended rational self interest, or stated in religious terms, the Golden Rule.

[CASteinman]

Actually the theory was that all you need for a free society is extended rational self interest, or stated in religious terms, the Golden Rule.

Which theory was that? I don't think it was the theory upon which at least some of the founders of our nation built it. They had a view of something like "virtue" which was not so milklike.