TheSkepticChristian Posted February 14, 2016 Posted February 14, 2016 12 minutes ago, Russell C McGregor said: "Political matters" is generally understood to refer to such things as elections, not proposed laws. "At least one and possibly two senators have abandoned their support of a medical-marijuana bill pending in the Utah Legislature after the LDS Church issued a statement opposing the measure." politics - "The activities associated with the governance of a country or other area"
ksfisher Posted February 14, 2016 Posted February 14, 2016 6 hours ago, TheSkepticChristian said: So you are saying the law of the Land has to be the law of God? No, I'm saying what I said, "I'm not sure the Lord distinguishes between the two."
TheSkepticChristian Posted February 14, 2016 Posted February 14, 2016 2 hours ago, ksfisher said: No, I'm saying what I said, "I'm not sure the Lord distinguishes between the two." he does https://www.lds.org/youth/article/being-in-the-world-but-not-of-the-world?lang=eng
thesometimesaint Posted February 14, 2016 Posted February 14, 2016 8 hours ago, TheSkepticChristian said: nothing to do with what I am saying, I am talking about separation between church and state. The First Presidency (Joseph F. Smith, John R. Winder, and Anthon H. Lund) stated the following in 1907: “The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints holds to the doctrine of the separation of church and state; the non-interference of church authority in political matters So if we say something it is a violation of Church and State, and if we say nothing we don't believe in following the law. Nice Catch 22 you've got going there.
JAHS Posted February 14, 2016 Posted February 14, 2016 23 hours ago, Kenngo1969 said: It's impossible to have a meaningful conversation with you. You keep moving the goal posts, demanding that everyone adopt your idiosyncratic use of language, engaging in faulty logic, and so forth. Knock yourself out. I'm out. Me too. 1
TheSkepticChristian Posted February 14, 2016 Posted February 14, 2016 (edited) 1 hour ago, thesometimesaint said: So if we say something it is a violation of Church and State, and if we say nothing we don't believe in following the law. Nice Catch 22 you've got going there. Again, doesn't have anything to do with what I am saying, of course we believe in obeying the law, but can we get back to the subject please? Edited February 14, 2016 by TheSkepticChristian
thesometimesaint Posted February 14, 2016 Posted February 14, 2016 17 minutes ago, TheSkepticChristian said: Again, doesn't have anything to do with what I am saying, of course we believe in following the law, but can we get back to the subject please? So is it shut your mouth and follow the law, or speak out and violate the separation of Church and State? Your choice. 1
TheSkepticChristian Posted February 14, 2016 Posted February 14, 2016 (edited) 26 minutes ago, thesometimesaint said: So is it shut your mouth and follow the law No, that is why we have politics. What bothers me is when church leaders get involved and influence your opinion. http://www.sltrib.com/home/3515194-155/mormon-church-opposition-to-marijuana-bill 26 minutes ago, thesometimesaint said: or speak out and violate the separation of Church and State? Your choice. I think religion needs to keep out of politics. Go to church, practice what you believe, but live and let live. There is no reason to get religion involved when there is a debate about politics. Edited February 14, 2016 by TheSkepticChristian
thesometimesaint Posted February 14, 2016 Posted February 14, 2016 Since when did members of a church/religion in the US give up their First Amendment rights? 1
TheSkepticChristian Posted February 14, 2016 Posted February 14, 2016 4 minutes ago, thesometimesaint said: Since when did members of a church/religion in the US give up their First Amendment rights? I agree with the First Amendment rights, but it doesn't mean church leaders should try to influence political decisions. We need to influence political decisions with secular arguments, not religious arguments. Again, church leaders are free to influence your personal life, but shouldn't influence political decisions.
thesometimesaint Posted February 14, 2016 Posted February 14, 2016 1 hour ago, TheSkepticChristian said: I agree with the First Amendment rights, but it doesn't mean church leaders should try to influence political decisions. We need to influence political decisions with secular arguments, not religious arguments. Again, church leaders are free to influence your personal life, but shouldn't influence political decisions. You can't have it both ways. Church leaders don't give up their rights just because they are church leaders, or you don't like what they say. Either you have the right to speak your mind to any who will listen, on any subject you want, or you don't. While LDS leaders have repeatedly spoken out against the drinking of alcohol, there is not one Dry county in Utah. SEE https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_dry_communities_by_U.S._state I don't favor prohibition by law of marijuana. I do favor personal prohibition 1
provoman Posted February 14, 2016 Posted February 14, 2016 On Saturday, February 13, 2016 at 9:50 AM, Russell C McGregor said: 11 hours ago, Russell C McGregor said: Sigh. "Political matters" is generally understood to refer to such things as elections, not proposed laws. Whether the Church is pushing for a particular candidate or expressing support for a particular proposed law, does not matter in the United States.
TheSkepticChristian Posted February 14, 2016 Posted February 14, 2016 (edited) 1 hour ago, thesometimesaint said: You can't have it both ways. Church leaders don't give up their rights just because they are church leaders, or you don't like what they say. Either you have the right to speak your mind to any who will listen, on any subject you want, or you don't. Church leaders can express their personal opinion as citizens, but making it the position of the church is not just an opinion. Edited February 14, 2016 by TheSkepticChristian
ksfisher Posted February 14, 2016 Posted February 14, 2016 3 hours ago, TheSkepticChristian said: No, that is why we have politics. What bothers me is when church leaders get involved and influence your opinion. http://www.sltrib.com/home/3515194-155/mormon-church-opposition-to-marijuana-bill I think religion needs to keep out of politics. Go to church, practice what you believe, but live and let live. There is no reason to get religion involved when there is a debate about politics. You are bothered when your opinion is influenced by the Lord's prophet? 1
Russell C McGregor Posted February 14, 2016 Posted February 14, 2016 5 hours ago, TheSkepticChristian said: No, that is why we have politics. What bothers me is when church leaders get involved and influence your opinion. http://www.sltrib.com/home/3515194-155/mormon-church-opposition-to-marijuana-bill I think religion needs to keep out of politics. Go to church, practice what you believe, but live and let live. There is no reason to get religion involved when there is a debate about politics. The debate isn't about politics. It's about the legislative regulation of medical treatments. And contrary to the counterfactual thread title, the Church isn't "opposing medical marijuana in Utah." It's taking a position on one bill regarding medical marijuana, but not another. Regulating medical treatments is not a "war on drugs" and doesn't give power to drug cartels. Your attempt to create a moral panic has failed. Do you have any reasoned arguments to make on this issue? 1
VideoGameJunkie Posted February 15, 2016 Author Posted February 15, 2016 In states where recreational use is legal like Colorado, Oregon, and Washington, do employers still drug test for marijuana and prevent you from employment if you test positive?
deli_llama Posted February 15, 2016 Posted February 15, 2016 In states where recreational use is legal like Colorado, Oregon, and Washington, do employers still drug test for marijuana and prevent you from employment if you test positive? To the best of my knowledge, and last I checked, employers in those states can still selectively screen for drugs and base their employment decision upon the results of those test (as they should). That would be regardless of its legal status in the state. Also, qualified medical use does not offer any cover or protection when it comes to employment and drug screening.
thesometimesaint Posted February 15, 2016 Posted February 15, 2016 7 hours ago, TheSkepticChristian said: Church leaders can express their personal opinion as citizens, but making it the position of the church is not just an opinion. Yes it is. Just like if a Baptist minister said the same thing. To me and millions of other people it is just his opinion. Whether it is a good opinion or not is up to each of us individually.
Kenngo1969 Posted February 15, 2016 Posted February 15, 2016 22 hours ago, TheSkepticChristian said: Me: ... unhealthy for example smoothies You: It depends what they are made of Ladies and Gentlemen: This, apparently, is an example of a logical fallacy to which I have fallen prey. Alas, given my limited intellect, I'm not seeing it, myself, but, nonetheless, will you please all join me in giving The Skeptic Christian a hearty, rousing round of applause for pointing it out to me?
TheSkepticChristian Posted February 15, 2016 Posted February 15, 2016 40 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said: Ladies and Gentlemen: This, apparently, is an example of a logical fallacy to which I have fallen prey. Alas, given my limited intellect, I'm not seeing it, myself, but, nonetheless, will you please all join me in giving The Skeptic Christian a hearty, rousing round of applause for pointing it out to me Gay Marriage will get you! Be afraid!
TheSkepticChristian Posted February 15, 2016 Posted February 15, 2016 1 hour ago, thesometimesaint said: Yes it is. Just like if a Baptist minister said the same thing. To me and millions of other people it is just his opinion. Whether it is a good opinion or not is up to each of us individually. How is the position of the church just a personal opinion?
Russell C McGregor Posted February 15, 2016 Posted February 15, 2016 17 hours ago, TheSkepticChristian said: How is the position of the church just a personal opinion? The position of the Church has the same force as an opinion when it comes to legislative matters. Anyone is entitled to listen to it if they want to. That entitlement extends to legislators. Anyone is entitled to ignore it if they want to. That entitlement also extends to legislators. The Church does not tell its members how to vote on any issue, including legislative matters where it has articulated a position. In witness whereof, I point to the fact that Harry Reid has a Temple Recommend. 1
TheSkepticChristian Posted February 16, 2016 Posted February 16, 2016 3 hours ago, Russell C McGregor said: The position of the Church has the same force as an opinion when it comes to legislative matters. Anyone is entitled to listen to it if they want to. That entitlement extends to legislators. Anyone is entitled to ignore it if they want to. That entitlement also extends to legislators. The Church does not tell its members how to vote on any issue, including legislative matters where it has articulated a position. In witness whereof, I point to the fact that Harry Reid has a Temple Recommend. but the position of the church is seen as the right path by most LDS, correct?
TheSkepticChristian Posted February 16, 2016 Posted February 16, 2016 4 hours ago, Russell C McGregor said: The position of the Church has the same force as an opinion when it comes to legislative matters. Anyone is entitled to listen to it if they want to. That entitlement extends to legislators. Anyone is entitled to ignore it if they want to. That entitlement also extends to legislators. The Church does not tell its members how to vote on any issue, including legislative matters where it has articulated a position. In witness whereof, I point to the fact that Harry Reid has a Temple Recommend. It is true that our church is not telling us how to vote, but it has a lot of power in the minds of most LDS. That is why two Senators changed their views. The position of the church is always seen as the right decision. If tomorrow the church announces that Women are going to be ordained to the priesthood, most LDS will gladly accept that. When our church says something, the debate is over.
sunstoned Posted February 16, 2016 Posted February 16, 2016 6 hours ago, Russell C McGregor said: The position of the Church has the same force as an opinion when it comes to legislative matters. Anyone is entitled to listen to it if they want to. That entitlement extends to legislators. Anyone is entitled to ignore it if they want to. That entitlement also extends to legislators. The Church does not tell its members how to vote on any issue, including legislative matters where it has articulated a position. In witness whereof, I point to the fact that Harry Reid has a Temple Recommend. The church employs lobbyist at the state capital. I would say that is a little more than just an opinion.
Recommended Posts