Bernard Gui Posted January 22, 2017 Posted January 22, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, Calm said: I have been in several countries and all of them had looser standards of morality being portrayed in their own programming. Undoubtedly there are some countries that have better morals than the US, I am not currently aware of any though. I didn't say you were proud of it, but it is an arrogant position in my opinion, that many Americans hold, that the US stands at the forefront of whatever in the world and from what I have seen, it most definitely does not, in part because many Americans practically ignore the existence of the rest of the world. From my perspective as a musician, I am saddened by the influence American pop music (rock music in particular) has had on the tradtional music of other cultures. Edited January 22, 2017 by Bernard Gui
Calm Posted January 22, 2017 Posted January 22, 2017 (edited) 14 hours ago, Bernard Gui said: From my perspective as a musician, I am saddened by the influence American pop music (rock music in particular) has had on the tradtional music of other cultures. I am not suggesting the US has no influence, but only that it isn't the primary trendsetter of the world...even the dominance of English owes a great deal to British influence setting up the foundation of Global English. What I see is an interweaving of influence, the US is influenced by others while the US influences them back. It is a global community these days, in spite of the isolationist tendencies of many. Edited January 22, 2017 by Calm
Popular Post 3DOP Posted January 22, 2017 Popular Post Posted January 22, 2017 4 hours ago, MiserereNobis said: Ok, I see the end of this thread is nigh. I'll try to bring it back around to the original post by saying that I often smile to myself when certain Evangelicals put Catholics and Mormons in the cult category together. The active Mormons I know (I'm outside of Utah) are almost without exception good folk trying to do their best in this world. While I think they are mistaken in their beliefs (as they think of me in mine), it is a "successful error" to use Rory/3DOP terms. And I find that they think that of my beliefs, too. In the end, we share much in common -- the belief in priesthood, authority, lineage, and leadership, the belief in heavenly apparitions and "revelations" (using the LDS term, not the Catholic one), the belief that more than the Bible is necessary, the belief in saving rituals, and so forth. So yes, we share a lot, but being a cult isn't one of them, and I'm glad to know good Mormons both here on the board and in real life off the board that are seeking God's will. +PAX+ Hey! I am undeserving but honored that someone has picked up on one of my favorite themes. Thanks for the cred. But if you love me you won't feed the beast (my vanity is ubiquitous). __________________ We will never elect a president who isn't a sinner. I voted for a sinner in voting for Trump. Whoever we elect, the electors are also sinners. Sinners electing, sinners elected. That is all we have to work with whether they are Democrats or Republicans. Assuredly, some have committed acts that are less unholy and I would favor holiness for those who are elected, but how is that going to happen until the electors are holy? This is why I believe it is okay to vote for a sinner who we think will promote unholiness the least. That was the principle which made me vote for Pres. Trump instead of Mrs. Clinton. If that is also the reason you voted for Mrs. Clinton, I am glad we share the same principle. Whether it is Clinton, the Clintons, or Trump, or FDR, or Reagan, or JFK, can we know we would not have succumbed to their temptations? I will not say so. It is easier to be chaste when you are powerless and uncomely together. I will not congratulate myself that I have never been with another woman than the mother of my children. I know the sins which I have committed and for which I would have been capable if not for circumstances unique to myself. With St. Paul, I proclaim my weakness, and if on that great Day I am free of condemnation, thanks be to God and to Him alone. This is not intended as a rebuke to anyone here. I am in favor of moral purity and thankful whenever we can avoid immorality. But allow me to say that I am uncomfortable with the way we are speaking like these public figures are so much worse than ourselves. I think we must always be wary of thanking God that we are not as other men...especially when we might be worse. Is it worse to be spiritually proud or unchaste? I would suggest and could argue that it is not necessarily the latter. I speak as one, who from fear of who I am, is unwilling to cast the stone. Domine non sum dignus. God bless. Happy Sunday. Rory 5
Sleeper Cell Posted January 22, 2017 Posted January 22, 2017 22 hours ago, The Nehor said: It is not. Trump ended up scraping the bottom of the barrel though to find groups to even show up. He did win Utah though so in that sense he was rewarding loyalty So, in you opinion, inviting the Mormon Tabernacle Choir is “scraping the bottom of the barrel?” He invited the Mormon Tabernacle Choir because: 1. it was hard to find other groups "to even show up” 2. to reward Utah Aren’t these two explanations contradictory?
The Nehor Posted January 22, 2017 Posted January 22, 2017 1 hour ago, Sleeper Cell said: So, in you opinion, inviting the Mormon Tabernacle Choir is “scraping the bottom of the barrel?” He invited the Mormon Tabernacle Choir because: 1. it was hard to find other groups "to even show up” 2. to reward Utah Aren’t these two explanations contradictory? In Trump's view, yes, I expect they were a little ways down his list. they are not contradictory. A backup plan can try to reward someone.
Gray Posted January 22, 2017 Posted January 22, 2017 Trump is responsible for his own actions. Let's not shift the blame to American culture. Cheating on your wife and bragging about sexually assaulting women are not American values. 4
Sleeper Cell Posted January 22, 2017 Posted January 22, 2017 4 hours ago, The Nehor said: they are not contradictory. A backup plan can try to reward someone. “Scraping the bottom of the barrel … to find groups to even show up” sounds more like desperation than a “backup plan.” And inviting someone just because nobody else would show up is hardly an attempt to “reward someone.“ If Trump intended invitations to musical groups as political rewards, why did he extend so many of them to those who strongly opposed him? 1
waveslider Posted January 23, 2017 Posted January 23, 2017 17 hours ago, Calm said: I am not suggesting the US has no influence, but only that it isn't the primary trendsetter of the world. Forgive me if I am totally off base here. I haven't read much of this thread at all, so I am jumping into the conversation while not even knowing what the conversation is about. I just looked at this last page here to see if I would be interested in this thread and it caught my attention, what Bernard Gui said since I like to play music too. America is the trendsetter when it comes to blues.... or at least was when blues first became a thing. I hope I didn't derail this thread, and I agree that for the most part America isn't the trendsetter very often in things.
Calm Posted January 23, 2017 Posted January 23, 2017 8 minutes ago, waveslider said: Forgive me if I am totally off base here. I haven't read much of this thread at all, so I am jumping into the conversation while not even knowing what the conversation is about. I just looked at this last page here to see if I would be interested in this thread and it caught my attention, what Bernard Gui said since I like to play music too. America is the trendsetter when it comes to blues.... or at least was when blues first became a thing. I hope I didn't derail this thread, and I agree that for the most part America isn't the trendsetter very often in things. I see very few trends these days being limited to one locale or person, there is so much interplay due to extensive traveling by many and of course even more extensive, use of the internet, which contributes both diversity and conformity. But historically, I do think that places and people could be isolated enough to produce unique sounds and sights and tastes and these could then travel and have greater impact. It is unfortunate in many ways that it is harder (imo of course) to develop independently and that many are too prone to imitate others in order to get attention rather than take risks and put in work to being different; in other ways it is a real gift we can be influenced by so many more if we allow ourselves to be open to new experiences. 1
waveslider Posted January 23, 2017 Posted January 23, 2017 8 minutes ago, Calm said: I see very few trends these days being limited to one locale or person, there is so much interplay due to extensive traveling by many and of course even more extensive, use of the internet, which contributes both diversity and conformity. But historically, I do think that places and people could be isolated enough to produce unique sounds and sights and tastes and these could then travel and have greater impact. It is unfortunate in many ways that it is harder (imo of course) to develop independently and that many are too prone to imitate others in order to get attention rather than take risks and put in work to being different; in other ways it is a real gift we can be influenced by so many more if we allow ourselves to be open to new experiences. I agree whole heartedly!
Recommended Posts