CH1 Now online for all membership

[Calm]

From the above link, something more uplifting so separate post:

"“It is a tradition in the funeral industry to provide funerals to the families of stillborn babies and very young infants at cost,” Cunningham says. “Funeral directors do not care to make a profit on the deaths of children, and in fact, the death of a young child saddens the whole firm more than almost anything else.”

The funeral industry also includes a number of charitable projects devoted to helping parents after a child’s death. A volunteer group called Little Angel Gowns makes burial garments for babies out of donated wedding dresses, and provides them at no cost to hospitals and funeral homes. The Tears Foundationassists grieving parents in paying for burial or cremation expenses after losing a baby. Eloise Woods, a natural burial ground in Texas, will bury infants at no charge."

[Tacenda]

8 minutes ago, Calm said:

I personally find embalming very disrespectful to both the body and God, I believe it is a tradition based on fear of death demonstrating a lack of faith in the hope of God (not that those who do it now  always feel that way).  We have been commanded to keep our bodies as pure as possible and avoid empty vanities.  What is more empty than having the perfect forever face that no one will ever see again?  And if by chance we are resurrected with the same body, all you guys with massive amounts of makeup...boy, bet that is going to be the hit of the resurrection preparty party.  

Why at death do we allow for our supposedly treasured and protected bodies to be filled with poison and stuff the face and body in order to create a more 'natural' unnatural appearance? Why do we try to stop the Godgiven processes of renewal and restoring that which we were given by the world back to the world? We then create endless landfills of nondecomposing bodies, force families to spend large amounts of money in a time they probably need it to pay medical, moving, cleaning, etc. bills.

http://mentalfloss.com/article/80944/17-behind-scenes-secrets-funeral-directors

"Funeral directors say that the most important part of preparing a body for a viewing is the “setting of the features”—creating a peaceful facial expression with a pleasant smile. But while it might look nice at the end, the work creating that appearance can be grisly. Morticians stuff the throat and nose with cotton and then suture the mouth shut, either using a curved needle and thread to stitch between the jawbone and nasal cavity or using a needle injector machine to accomplish a similar job more quickly. Small spiked cups are also inserted under the eyelids to keep the lids closed and the eyes from caving in.

Of course, some bodies take more restoration than others. One mortician says that to prepare a decapitated corpse for an open-casket viewing, he uses a wooden dowel to rejoin the head and body, then sutures the neck back together....

Some caskets that have vacuum-seal rubber gaskets are marketed as “protective” or resistant to the “entry of outside elements.” As Harris details in Grave Matters, this creates conditions that encourage the growth of anaerobic bacteria, which break the body down by putrefying it, “turning soft body parts to mush and bloating the corpse with foul-smelling gas … Inside the sealed casket, the result is a funereal version of the decay that’s found in swamp bottoms and the bowels of unturned compost piles.”...

While the formaldehyde embalmers use does contain a rosy dye to restore color to graying, lifeless flesh, it’s not always sufficient. According to Cunningham, “mortuary schools teach color theory and stage lighting—how to use colored gels over the ceiling lights.” Doughty also mentions that bodies are often set out for visitation displayed under rose-colored light bulbs.

10. IT ALL GOES RIGHT DOWN THE DRAIN.

You’d think all the chemicals and body fluids involved in embalming would be disposed of like biohazard, but it’s industry practice to just wash it all off the table, right into the drain. Harris points out that just one embalming can generate 120 gallons of “funeral waste”—blood, fecal matter, and the former contents of internal organs, in addition to any chemicals in the preservation fluid itself—and it all ends up in the public sewer system, to be eventually released into waterways. Although, as Wilde points out, “Blood isn’t any worse than the other things that go down the loo.”"

Wow Calm, I had no idea. I think I just want to be cremated and made into a tree...

 

[Calm]

11 minutes ago, rongo said:

I know they are. They aren't elective, though.

You know, the advice given to us when we were married was to wait a couple of years to start having children. If we had it to do over again, we would start right away. We were told that we would have been poor students (which we were, anyway), we needed time to bond as a couple before kids come along, it will be too many stresses while in school, etc. But after 20 years of marriage and 4 kids, we see that we would have been just fine. 

Interestingly, we had planned on 5-6 kids, but after the 4th, for the first time we could visualize ourselves stopping at 4. It was then that my wife was hospitalized and had a colectomy and an ileectomy, and we were told not to have any more. Also interesting: we were told that they were stunned that we had any kids at all. Most of the women who have this are unable to and spontaneously abort. So, we feel very, very blessed and fortunate. 

We are very leery about contraceptives. As I said, we believe that they caused my wife's clotting disorder (doctors have told us that we are probably right, but that it would be impossible to prove that it was *the* cause, and not genetics or a combination of both). 

So, while I know the Church's position on birth control and have no problem with it, I'm not a fan, personally. I'm scared to have my daughter on it when she's married. 

Could never handle the pills, sent me into deep depression.  There are other forms that are very effective as long as you actually use them.

Edited November 17, 2017 by Calm

[blueglass]

On 11/16/2017 at 12:07 PM, Scott Lloyd said:

The premise of your complaint here is that people are entitled to Church membership/fellowship no matter what they do. That’s not true. Choices have consequences. And the Church is not the federal government. It’s a private entity. 

If you come into my home and behave in a way I don’t like, I have the right to boot you out. It’s not interfering with your rights if I do. 

And I called his post gibberish because he was making absurd and over-the-top claims. That ought to be clear enough. To use your words, it was “for effect,” “to bring the point home.”

By the way, what’s with the scare quotes around “do it or else church discipline”?  Whom are you quoting there? 

A close friend of mine worked with Lindsay Van Allen in the primary when the church intervened and proceeded to pressure her and Kirk for posting a blog with personal views on section 132 in spring 2015.  The area authority seventy said they were violating HB1 sec. 17.1.24, Personal internet Use "Members are encouraged to be examples of their faith at all times and in all places, including on the internet. If they use blogs, social networks, and other internet technologies, they are encouraged to strengthen others and help them become aware of that which is useful, good, and praiseworthy."  As the van Allen's had publicly declared on a blog that section132 was in their view not inspired, they were harassed by church local authorities none of whom had read the church essays and pressured to shut it down.  Within 10months the stake president where they moved to in Boise had forcibly requested them to choose between either 1) resigning from the church or 2) be subject to further church discipline for being less active, and non-believing.   Previously as per HB1 sec. 6.7.3 "Total inactivity in the church or attending another church does not constitute apostasy." but now if you have a personal blog post discussing why you had a faith crisis, the local authorities may immediately escalate hb1 section 6.7.3  paragraph 1 and 2 violations and immediately call a disciplinary council if your blog post is not taken down.  

My personal view is that the church Intellectual Reserve attorneys have subscribed to a search service to automatically generate alerts when anything comes up with the word "mormon" in the domain name.  As the van Allen's blog had the word "mormon" in the domain name it was immediately flagged and they vigorously prosecuted the owners, material evidence sent to the strengthening the members committee for audit, and local area authority seventy contacted to take action. 

Leadership roulette is at play and some individuals like Carol Lynn Pearson who has also published a book denouncing doctrinal polygamy has avoided church discipline.  

 

Edited November 18, 2017 by blueglass

[rongo]

Just now, Calm said:

Could never handle the pills, sent me into deep depression.

That hormonal manipulation is not good or healthy. How could it be? You're designed to ovulate and for fertilized ova to attach to the uterus wall. Hormonal imbalance to ensure that this doesn't happen doesn't seem good for the body (and some cancers are linked to contraception). 

Physical implants that irritate and force the same thing also seem --- not good for you.

[Calm]

Tac, here are some persuasive details:

http://www.cracked.com/personal-experiences-1368-5-horrifying-truths-about-funeral-homes-from-undertaker.html

[Tacenda]

15 minutes ago, rongo said:

I know they are. They aren't elective, though.

You know, the advice given to us when we were married was to wait a couple of years to start having children. If we had it to do over again, we would start right away. We were told that we would have been poor students (which we were, anyway), we needed time to bond as a couple before kids come along, it will be too many stresses while in school, etc. But after 20 years of marriage and 4 kids, we see that we would have been just fine. 

Interestingly, we had planned on 5-6 kids, but after the 4th, for the first time we could visualize ourselves stopping at 4. It was then that my wife was hospitalized and had a colectomy and an ileectomy, and we were told not to have any more. Also interesting: we were told that they were stunned that we had any kids at all. Most of the women who have this are unable to and spontaneously abort. So, we feel very, very blessed and fortunate. 

We are very leery about contraceptives. As I said, we believe that they caused my wife's clotting disorder (doctors have told us that we are probably right, but that it would be impossible to prove that it was *the* cause, and not genetics or a combination of both). 

So, while I know the Church's position on birth control and have no problem with it, I'm not a fan, personally. I'm scared to have my daughter on it when she's married. 

I dislike birth control pills. I believe condoms are best all around. Less disease is spread, or infections etc. Hope I can be graphic like that.

[rongo]

2 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I dislike birth control pills. I believe condoms are best all around. Less disease is spread, or infections etc. Hope I can be graphic like that.

We didn't like them. That was a big factor in getting the vasectomy. And, while my wife didn't get pregnant with them, we did have the two scares. And they could well have failed in a couple of instances (breakages, etc.). 

[blueglass]

On 11/16/2017 at 9:55 AM, smac97 said:

CFR, please.

Thanks,

-Smac

HB1, pg vi

[Calm]

10 minutes ago, rongo said:

That hormonal manipulation is not good or healthy. How could it be? You're designed to ovulate and for fertilized ova to attach to the uterus wall. Hormonal imbalance to ensure that this doesn't happen doesn't seem good for the body (and some cancers are linked to contraception). 

Physical implants that irritate and force the same thing also seem --- not good for you.

Almost caused a divorce within the first month of marriage as I went dead emotionally.  Must have scared my husband to big time.

Barriers (diaphragms) and spermicide worked fine for us...but then I never risked going without.  Sorry if TMI for some, people should, imo, consider them more often.  Feel free to ask me to edit or report in case I get back to sleep like I should (driving in the early hours of the morning to .SL and back is doing a number on me...one more week) if you think I have gone too far in personal details.  To me, it is medical info.

Edited November 17, 2017 by Calm

[blueglass]

On 11/16/2017 at 10:50 AM, smac97 said:

And a rank falsehood, to boot.

Thanks,

-Smac

Just follow HB1, sec 17.1.24 and you'll be safe.  

[bluebell]

16 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I dislike birth control pills. I believe condoms are best all around. Less disease is spread, or infections etc. Hope I can be graphic like that.

Me neither.  Hormonal birth control messes you up.  I felt like i was going crazy.  Plus, my hair started falling out when I went off of them.  No thanks.

[kiwi57]

On 11/17/2017 at 10:01 AM, cinepro said:

Well, not anymore.

Well, not actually ever.

[strappinglad]

My grandmother made it VERY clear to the family that she was to be embalmed. She had a deathly fear of being buried alive, either from experiences told to her or personal info. In her day it was not as easy to prove someone was actually dead and not in a comatose state. Nothing like having the deceased sit up in the coffin during a wake. Mind you, cremation would guarantee errors would be overlooked. A family friend ran a crematorium in the Northwest US. This was over 60 years ago. He was LDS and had approached the Brethren about whether or not the practice was forbidden for LDS folks. He received the same guidance then as is now in the HB. Now that the Church is getting more growth where cremation is traditional/accepted, the policy may be updated. Oh, and if you think the embalming process is invasive , never watch an autopsy .

[rockpond]

I wonder if we can apply Elder Ballard’s statement from his devotional address earlier this week.  Transcript isn’t published yet but here is how the Tribune reported his comment:

“I am a general authority but that doesn’t make me an authority in general,” he then quipped. “I worry that members expect too much from their leaders and teachers, expecting them to be experts [in areas and topics] well beyond their expertise. If you have a question that requires an expert, please take the time to find an expert to help you.”

When it comes to a question on a vasectomy or cremation, are the unnamed authors of the handbook the experts?  When I chose to get a vasectomy I consulted urologists and my wife.  They were the experts on my vasectomy.  I didn’t think to counsel with my bishop or reference the handbook as I see no particular expertise there. 

[hope_for_things]

1 hour ago, rockpond said:

I wonder if we can apply Elder Ballard’s statement from his devotional address earlier this week.  Transcript isn’t published yet but here is how the Tribune reported his comment:

“I am a general authority but that doesn’t make me an authority in general,” he then quipped. “I worry that members expect too much from their leaders and teachers, expecting them to be experts [in areas and topics] well beyond their expertise. If you have a question that requires an expert, please take the time to find an expert to help you.”

When it comes to a question on a vasectomy or cremation, are the unnamed authors of the handbook the experts?  When I chose to get a vasectomy I consulted urologists and my wife.  They were the experts on my vasectomy.  I didn’t think to counsel with my bishop or reference the handbook as I see no particular expertise there. 

Yes, I thought the same thing earlier.  The Elder Ballard comments are quite applicable.  Perhaps he’s seeing the wisdom of poor advice given in times past under impetus of prophetic authority.  Setting more realistic expectations makes a lot of sense.  

[CV75]

It seems the focus now is on Handbook 2, cremation and vasectomies. I see that cremation falls under “Medical and Health Policies” (temporal concerns) while vasectomies fall under “Polices on Moral Issues” (worthiness concerns). Some moral issues have a medical component, mostly those touching upon procreation (13 of the 16 policies).

While all things are spiritual, it seems the reliance on priesthood keys for revelation are priorities for the moral issues, as evidenced by consultation and counseling (or following published counsel) with priesthood leaders and Church discipline being mentioned only in the Policies on Moral Issues (out of the 16 policies, counsel with a leader is suggested twice; published counsel is referenced twice; consultation is suggested 3 times; discipline is mentioned 5 times), but only a consult with leaders is recommended (once) in the Medical and Health Policies, and in connection with assistance in identifying appropriate temporal resources.

So the handbooks acknowledge the spiritual aspects of medical and health issues while also acknowledging the priority for priesthood counsel and discipline in the moral issues. I don’t think members need to have either handbook in order to make good decisions. The Lord watches out for and inspires us all, and will either lead the members to seek and obtain counsel if they need it (assuming they wish to be led!) or lead His servants, their designees (including home and visiting teachers), or family members to discern others’ need for counsel.

[The Nehor]

They do this right after I get access?

Now how am I supposed to feel special?

Jerks.....  

[Thinking]

5 hours ago, bluebell said:

Me neither.  Hormonal birth control messes you up.  I felt like i was going crazy.  Plus, my hair started falling out when I went off of them.  No thanks.

The pill messed with my wife. I felt like she was a different person. I told her to stop before she finished her first month. We used other methods.

[kiwi57]

8 hours ago, rockpond said:

I wonder if we can apply Elder Ballard’s statement from his devotional address earlier this week.  Transcript isn’t published yet but here is how the Tribune reported his comment:

“I am a general authority but that doesn’t make me an authority in general,” he then quipped. “I worry that members expect too much from their leaders and teachers, expecting them to be experts [in areas and topics] well beyond their expertise. If you have a question that requires an expert, please take the time to find an expert to help you.”

When it comes to a question on a vasectomy or cremation, are the unnamed authors of the handbook the experts?  When I chose to get a vasectomy I consulted urologists and my wife.  They were the experts on my vasectomy.  I didn’t think to counsel with my bishop or reference the handbook as I see no particular expertise there. 

I'm sure Elder Ballard's statement has a number of valid applications.

I'm equally sure that it has a number of non-valid applications.

And I'm 100% positive that those non-valid applications will surface almost immediately.

And probably not accidentally.

[kiwi57]

15 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Yes. Which was the point of my citing the song "Dem Bones."

Some things are a matter of symbolism and reverence. For example, we use consecrated oil in administering priesthood blessings, even though we know it is not the oil, but rather, priesthood power, that does the healing.

We respect the human body after death (embalm it, place it in a casket, etc.), even though we believe, as you say. that its physical state will not matter when it comes time for the resurrection.

 

It was a reply to smac but it was addressed generally. Many if not most of my posts are like that.

Well Scott, I've been all the way through this thread, and I can't for the life of me see where you've posted anything that any reasonable person could get upset about.

There's not even one of those capricious and unexplained "Poster removed" notices on one of your posts.

Oh, well. I guess that's just the way things are around here.

[Rain]

2 hours ago, kiwi57 said:

Well Scott, I've been all the way through this thread, and I can't for the life of me see where you've posted anything that any reasonable person could get upset about.

There's not even one of those capricious and unexplained "Poster removed" notices on one of your posts.

Oh, well. I guess that's just the way things are around here.

If he is banned from this thread he won't be able to read that and may wonder what you are saying to him. 

[smac97]

17 hours ago, Calm said:

Tac, here are some persuasive details:

http://www.cracked.com/personal-experiences-1368-5-horrifying-truths-about-funeral-homes-from-undertaker.html

Here's a video about alternatives to creation.  It has really given me something to think about:

Thanks,

-Smac

[Tacenda]

1 hour ago, Rain said:

If he is banned from this thread he won't be able to read that and may wonder what you are saying to him. 

He can if he looks at it as a guest and doesn't sign in. I finally figured that out, haha. But of course he can't participate. I'm thinking there had to be a glitch because banning Scott, is unheard of in my book.

[Jeanne]

42 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

He can if he looks at it as a guest and doesn't sign in. I finally figured that out, haha. But of course he can't participate. I'm thinking there had to be a glitch because banning Scott, is unheard of in my book.

Ah!!!  If this is true....can I write down the date and time of this happening???