Killing Saints

[Robert F. Smith]

10 hours ago, JAHS said:

I think they qualified they meant murder when they said "As cain killed Abel". That was definitely murder.

So why not more accurately say "As Cain murdered Abel."

ETA: I spoke without having looked at the Hebrew, which simply says that Cain slew Abel.

Edited July 24, 2019 by Robert F. Smith

[JAHS]

24 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

2 hours ago, JAHS said:

I think they qualified they meant murder when they said "As cain killed Abel". That was definitely murder.

So why not more accurately say "As Cain murdered Abel."

I don't know. I assume they were just sticking with a general term (kill, slew) so people could relate to what they are referring to in the Bible. If you murder someone you are killing them. 

[The Nehor]

57 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

So why not more accurately say "As Cain murdered Abel."

Because they were differentiating that murder as a kind of killing I would imagine.

I should add to what I said before that I do not think joining the armed forces of a nation is always or even usually a sin. I think, that like all major decisions of that nature, the decision to join should be prayed about. Some people should not put themselves in that kind of situation because they cannot handle conflict or like it too much.

For a nation’s military that focuses on defense there is probably no issue. For one that is big into meddling violently irresponsibly (and I am not meaning to conclude the US or any other specific nation in this statement;  I personally believe the most egregious examples would be the colonial powers maintaining empires) would hesitate. Then there are some militaries that are tools of tyrants I would consider not serving in even if compelled. The worst are those that actively oppress their own people.

We should also not take war too seriously as “the great evil”. It is an evil and death is not good but dying in combat is actually probably one of the quickest and least painful ways to go. Compare a gunshot wound that kills instantly or in seconds or minutes  to months or years battling cancer or other wasting diseases. War is also mostly impersonal except, as Papa rightly pointed out, the camaraderie of those you fight with. Wars are fought in the abstract for ideals or liberty or territory or glory or whatever but it has been shown repeatedly that to the people in the trenches they are fighting for the guys next to them. It is a great tragedy that people fought in, for example, WWII over land some of the soldiers probably could not have found on a map before the war started but that naïveté is also strangely comical and even reassuring. While war leads to suffering and pain and I do not want to minimize that it is also just human insanity run amok and it is the kind of evil that cannot last.

As C.S. Lewis said:

“I have often thought to myself how it would have been if, when I served in the first World War, I and some young German had killed each other simultaneously and found ourselves together a moment after death. I cannot imagine that either of us would have felt any resentment or even any embarrassment. I think we might have laughed over it.”

Edited July 24, 2019 by The Nehor

[Robert F. Smith]

7 hours ago, JAHS said:

I don't know. I assume they were just sticking with a general term (kill, slew) so people could relate to what they are referring to in the Bible. If you murder someone you are killing them. 

I spoke without having looked at the Hebrew, which simply says that Cain slew Abel.

[blarsen]

My rule of thumb is I'm justified in defending myself, my family and my country, if any of these entities are attacked through no fault of their own.  It's basically the Christian concept of what constitutes a just war, or right to self defense.  Paul Ramsey about beats the subject to death in his book:  War and the Christian Conscience - How shall modern war be conducted justly?"   And surprise, surprise, the concept is found very clearly explicated throughout the Book of Mormon.

I'm especially wary of any governmental drumbeat about the necessity of going to war with any country for whatever reason,  outside of direct attack from the country; and would feel fully justified to avoid getting sucked up in such activity in any way my fertile imagination could dream up, except doing harm to myself or others, and I would encourage my kids to do the same.

Edited July 25, 2019 by blarsen

[Stargazer]

On 7/23/2019 at 9:47 PM, The Nehor said:

Wait, everyone has abandoned the urge to kill?

Come Pinky, we have work to do.

Did you create this meme?  If so, great work!

[Stargazer]

On 7/23/2019 at 9:57 PM, LoudmouthMormon said:

Colorado Springs is host to a lot of military.  Fort Carson, Air Force academy, Cheyenne Mountain complex, Lots of space/satellite command stuff, Lockheed Martin, etc.  Had plenty of military folks in my ward over the years.  The one guy who stands out was former CIA, training our satellite operators how to look for bad guys.  One Elders Quorum, he walked us through the training process - which includes mandatory counseling after everyone is introduced to the horrible evil animal things our enemies do to people, and how air and ground assets identify it when it's happening, and how it's dealt with.   Not everyone makes it through that training, the greatest rates of dropping out happen shortly after coming face to face with evil of that blatant, gory magnitude.

No, some of our enemies aren't just people of different political persuasions.  Some of them, through their own actions, have torn up any reasonable 'live on planet earth with the humans' card. 

Stuff gets real morally clear after learning certain realities.  God relies on His good children to protect all of us from His bad children.  

The answer to your question Mark Beesley, is yes, yes 21st Century Latter-day Saints should serve in combat units in a country's militaries, but only in the good countries.

 

All you have to do is read Solzhenitzen's "The Gulag Archipelago", and "The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression" (by Stéphane Courtois, Nicolas Werth, Andrzej Paczkowski and several other European academics)  to gain the insight that, if anything, the Soviet Union and the other Communist states were just as, if not more, evil than their counterpart in Germany.  Would a figure in excess of 94 million killed NOT disgust anyone?

Anyone who names the USA as any kind of evil, in comparison to that lot, and therefore not worthy of the blood of its patriots, is patently insane, and if not said in ignorance, morally bankrupt.

 

[Stargazer]

On 7/23/2019 at 9:59 PM, mfbukowski said:

😂🤣😆

One of the best shows ever!

One of my favorite scenes:

 

[Stargazer]

On 7/23/2019 at 10:15 PM, Mark Beesley said:

 I am reminded of the account that I heard while I was on my mission in Germany of an American soldier who was executed alongside a German soldier during WWII because the American refused to execute his fellow Latter-day Saints brother who was caught stealing food. Perhaps he would have been “justified“ in shooting his brother, but he would have missed out on the blessings that he undoubtedly had showered upon him by their Father in Heaven for loving his brother more than his country.

I am reminded that the account (ja, ich habe diese Geschichte auch gehoert) is a complete fabrication.

Now, please explain to me how a POW could be legally executed for theft, and even more to the point how a soldier could even be prosecuted, let alone executed, for disobedience of an order to participate in a firing squad?  There were 95 US soldiers in Europe executed for rape or murder, and one for desertion.  There were no other executions for any other offense, to the best of my knowledge, but I'm pretty confident of this.  

And let's take this a bit further, shall we?  If a Latter-day Saint were to commit murder and be sentenced to death, would it somehow be morally wrong for a Latter-day Saint to flip the switch on the electric chair to execute him?  Or participate in the firing squad? I don't think so.  Or do you disagree?

Edited July 25, 2019 by Stargazer

[pogi]

On 7/23/2019 at 1:36 PM, Mark Beesley said:

In at least one regard I believe the Jehovah’s Witnesses got it right. They don’t to pledge allegiance to anyone but God. 

I hope they cherish their rights of pacifism and religion, because they didn’t come without a fight.

[Stargazer]

20 hours ago, The Nehor said:

As C.S. Lewis said:

“I have often thought to myself how it would have been if, when I served in the first World War, I and some young German had killed each other simultaneously and found ourselves together a moment after death. I cannot imagine that either of us would have felt any resentment or even any embarrassment. I think we might have laughed over it.”

I read an interesting vignette in the book "Saints at War". Here it is:

========================

Gerald Mervin Bolton 
World War II, Europe, Army 

Gerald was with another GI who was a Latter-day Saint. This was unusual; there were very few men he had found in his regiment that were Mormons. The two men were behind some rubble and could see a German soldier creeping toward them from a path below with his rifle ready. Gerald’s companion fired and killed the German. They went down to search him and found he had papers on him that identified him as a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Gerald’s buddy sat and cried. He was so devastated because he had killed another Mormon. He was so overcome that he couldn’t stop crying, and Gerald feared that he would have a mental breakdown and requested that he be sent back of the line for a few days rest.

A couple of nights later he had a dream. He told Gerald that it was so real he wasn’t sure if it was a dream or if the man was actually there. The German soldier came to him and said “Please don’t mourn for me. You’ve done me a favor, for now I am out of the war and have found happiness as you will never know on earth. I thank you, and am sorry that you still have to endure the hell I have been so fortunate to leave.” From that night on the GI was alright and his faith had been strengthened.

(from the chapter Divine Preservation)

======================

My comment on this:

Death is not the evil we think it is. Men and women do evil things, and murdering their brothers and sisters is definitely evil, but to those who die, however it happened, in war or in peace, death is the natural progression of life. I don't think that those who die are sitting on the other side raging that they are dead. For those who die unrepented of the evil they did in their days, death is not their problem, it is their own evil acts that they will be raging at!  Whereas those who die "at one" with God will rejoice that their test is over and that they have "finished the race". 

When my wife died I was numb, but there was peace in the house that I hadn't noticed until the Relief Society President pointed it out.  Death was my wife's comfort in the end, and I know she is waiting for me on the other side to come help her do the work that is there to be done.  I pray that it not be too soon, but when the time goes I will go rejoicing.
 

Edited July 25, 2019 by Stargazer

[Stargazer]

On 7/23/2019 at 10:31 PM, Mark Beesley said:

 I wouldn’t be in the least surprised if nuclear arsenals aren’t deployed when Christ returns in glory. And I can see in my mind’s eye the transformation of all those weapons into butterflies at the command of our Lord.

I would be surprised if nukes don't get used in the runup to the second coming.  It's going to be really nasty towards the end.

And yes, I like butterflies, too!

On 7/23/2019 at 10:31 PM, Mark Beesley said:

Taking up arms in defense of oneself or one’s country or whatever is nothing more than trusting in the arm of flesh.

I call BS on that one.

The Anti-Nephi-Lehies refused to take up arms to defend their adopted country because they had taken a solemn oath not to take up arms for any purpose; they wanted to, but were persuaded not to break their oaths.  Yet they still sent their sons who had not taken the oath to fight and possibly die in defense of their country.  And were rewarded by losing none of them in battle, while those sons took many lives of those of their parents' former countrymen.  Are you going to claim they were trusting in the arm of flesh in taking up arms?

And how do you interpret this:

Alma 43:47 -

47 And again, the Lord has said that: Ye shall defend your families even unto bloodshed. Therefore for this cause were the Nephites contending with the Lamanites, to defend themselves, and their families, and their lands, their country, and their rights, and their religion.

I was teaching in Elders Quorum one Sunday when one of our brethren, who was just as into pacifism as you seem to be, claimed that the above scripture was just for the Nephites and didn't apply to our day.  And so, on the following Sunday I made sure to bring up:

“The Book of Mormon … was written for our day. The Nephites never had the book; neither did the Lamanites of ancient times. It was meant for us. Mormon wrote near the end of the Nephite civilization. Under the inspiration of God, who sees all things from the beginning, he abridged centuries of records, choosing the stories, speeches, and events that would be most helpful to us.

“Each of the major writers of the Book of Mormon testified that he wrote for future generations. … If they saw our day and chose those things which would be of greatest worth to us, is not that how we should study the Book of Mormon? We should constantly ask ourselves, ‘Why did the Lord inspire Mormon (or Moroni or Alma) to include that in his record? What lesson can I learn from that to help me live in this day and age?’” (Teachings: Ezra Taft Benson, 140).

-- Found in "Teachings and Doctrine of the Book of Mormon Teacher Manual", Lesson 6.

I looked directly at the brother in question after the bolded sentence was brought up, and he gave me a rather sour look.  I got the point a few years later as to why he thought he wouldn't want to defend his family unto bloodshed -- because he clearly thought it OK to divorce his wife without cause and abandon his family instead.  Which is what he did.

On 7/23/2019 at 10:31 PM, Mark Beesley said:

The Israelites didn’t need it to escape from Egypt and Hezekiah didn’t need it save Jerusalem from Sennecherib’s invading army. 2 Kings 19.

The Israelites couldn't have taken up arms successfully, because the Egyptian army could have wiped them out in a day (and being slaves, they were not permitted weapons).  Their only way out was for the Lord to intervene on their behalf, first to get Pharaoh to let them go, and secondly to stop Pharaoh from destroying them while they were fleeing.  The same was true of Hezekiah - without the Lord's intervention, Judah couldn't have prevailed militarily over Sennacherib.  You seem to think that the Lord will miraculously intervene so that his people need never get their hair mussed.  Very idealistic of you, but no, it doesn't work like that. The Lord expects us to do what we can, and only when we have done all that we can will he intervene.  OK, maybe He'll make us do a lot of it before He'll intervene, but I hope I make myself clear.

Luke 22:35-38 -

35 And he said unto them, When I sent you without purse, and scrip, and shoes, lacked ye any thing? And they said, Nothing.
36 Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.
37 For I say unto you, that this that is written must yet be accomplished in me, And he was reckoned among the transgressors: for the things concerning me have an end.
38 And they said, Lord, behold, here are two swords. And he said unto them, It is enough.

The Lord's advice here is to weapon up (and take your own food and money, too, because you'll be out among the Gentiles and you know how they can be).  And two swords for the Twelve is sufficient, at least to start with, though I bet twelve wouldn't have been too many.  I've heard people try to eisegete the clear meaning of this to say that Jesus didn't intend this to be taken literally about the swords.  And how would they know?  Orson Scott Card in the script for Living Scriptures' Dramatized New Testament has the Lord's word "It is enough" come out "Enough! Will you never understand what I say?" as if He really didn't want them to have a sword, he was just being... something.  The thing is, if Jesus didn't really mean it about selling your garment to buy a sword, he must not have meant it about going with purse and scrip either, right?  Or in other words, Jesus was telling his apostles it was Opposite Day, and they shouldn't do what he told them.  Poppycock.

 

[The Nehor]

I would point out as well that a true Zion would never need to fight. Either their enemies would not come against them or (like he did with Enoch’s city) God would fight their battles for them. While Captain Moroni and those who followed him were justified in the fighting the Lamanites it was because of the wickedness of the people in general that they had to fight and I think Captain Moroni would have been the first to concur.

[blarsen]

16 hours ago, blarsen said:

My rule of thumb is I'm justified in defending myself, my family and my country, if any of these entities are attacked through no fault of their own.  It's basically the Christian concept of what constitutes a just war, or right to self defense.  Paul Ramsey about beats the subject to death in his book:  War and the Christian Conscience - How shall modern war be conducted justly?"   And surprise, surprise, the concept is found very clearly explicated throughout the Book of Mormon.

I'm especially wary of any governmental drumbeat about the necessity of going to war with any country for whatever reason,  outside of direct attack from the country; and would feel fully justified to avoid getting sucked up in such activity in any way my fertile imagination could dream up, except doing harm to myself or others, and I would encourage my kids to do the same.

One of my dearest wishes would be to see the general awareness level of the LDS community rise up to a clear understanding of their own scriptures regarding what constitutes just war . . . . and act accordingly.

Unfortunately,  it probably won't happen anytime soon.  I wonder how many Sophie Scholls (Resistance of the White Rose) or Helmut Huebners our community could muster to equal the courage these folks displayed in resisting unjust war and tyranny, and in facing their ultimate execution (Sophie was the first of her group to be murdered by the Nazi machine . . . .  guillotined).

[Mark Beesley]

On 7/25/2019 at 7:29 AM, Stargazer said:

And how do you interpret this:

Alma 43:47 -

47 And again, the Lord has said that: Ye shall defend your families even unto bloodshed. Therefore for this cause were the Nephites contending with the Lamanites, to defend themselves, and their families, and their lands, their country, and their rights, and their religion.

 

I interpret it in light of Mormon 7:4,  “Know ye that ye must lay down your weapons of war, and delight no more in the shedding of blood, and take them not again, save it be that God shall command you.”

I am unaware of any conflict since the Utah War where the Lord had commanded us to take up weapons of war. There are plenty of Gentiles willing to kill in waging America’s wars. I don’t need to.

And your crap about the Lord having to intervene for the Israelites and Hezekiah is just that, crap. Silly to even argue it.

 

Edited July 26, 2019 by Mark Beesley

[Mark Beesley]

On 7/25/2019 at 5:47 AM, Stargazer said:

I am reminded that the account (ja, ich habe diese Geschichte auch gehoert) is a complete fabrication.

Now, please explain to me how a POW could be legally executed for theft, and even more to the point how a soldier could even be prosecuted, let alone executed, for disobedience of an order to participate in a firing squad?  There were 95 US soldiers in Europe executed for rape or murder, and one for desertion.  There were no other executions for any other offense, to the best of my knowledge, but I'm pretty confident of this.  

And let's take this a bit further, shall we?  If a Latter-day Saint were to commit murder and be sentenced to death, would it somehow be morally wrong for a Latter-day Saint to flip the switch on the electric chair to execute him?  Or participate in the firing squad? I don't think so.  Or do you disagree?

You are welcome to believe it was a fabrication if you want.

Illegal stuff happens all the time in war, by soldiers and their commanders. Don't be so naive.

As for your query regarding executing murderers, my general opposition to capital punishment aside, I’m pretty sure the Church excommunicates murderers.

Next . . .

[Mark Beesley]

On 7/25/2019 at 6:09 AM, pogi said:

I hope they cherish their rights of pacifism and religion, because they didn’t come without a fight.

Again, nowadays there are plenty of Gentiles willing to kill.

[smac97]

14 minutes ago, Mark Beesley said:

You are welcome to believe it was a fabrication if you want.

I would be happy to be corrected on this point.  Could you provide a reference for this story?  Is it documented anywhere?  Names?  Locations?  Dates?

It has all the earmarks of an FPR (Faith-Promoting Rumor), I'm afraid.

14 minutes ago, Mark Beesley said:

Illegal stuff happens all the time in war, by soldiers and their commanders. Don't be so naive.

FPRs happen all the time, too.  And I think we need to be careful about them.  Very careful, indeed.

Thanks,

-Smac

[pogi]

50 minutes ago, Mark Beesley said:

Again, nowadays there are plenty of Gentiles willing to kill.

Yes, there are many willing to put their very lives at risk to defend and protect your rights, religious privileges, and pacifist views (not just gentiles, but saints alike) so that you don’t have to.  They deserve your thanks, but it feels like you are judging them of some terrible sin, and being condescending by calling them “gentiles” when you know that there are righteous saints who serve in the military.

1 hour ago, Mark Beesley said:

I interpret it in light of Mormon 7:4,  “Know ye that ye must lay down your weapons of war, and delight no more in the shedding of blood, and take them not again, save it be that God shall command you.”

I am unaware of any conflict since the Utah War where the Lord had commanded us to take up weapons of war. There are plenty of Gentiles willing to kill in waging America’s wars. I don’t need to.

We also believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates....

This is what the church has said about war, and I agree:

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-topics/war?lang=eng

[Mark Beesley]

55 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I would be happy to be corrected on this point.  Could you provide a reference for this story?  Is it documented anywhere?  Names?  Locations?  Dates?

If I were to declare that it was confirmed to me by the Spirit, would that be Spirit Manipulation?

Would the recollection of one of the relations of the slain German have satisfied you? Probably not.

The point is, it is better to die than to knowingly shed the blood of another Saint, I believe.

The war-related message of the Book of Mormon is that wars solve nothing, a covenant people should rely on the Lord, and it is ok to have non-covenant people wage wars in our defense.

This is not about whether or not a Saint sins in going to war. The Lord has made it clear that there is no sin in defending one’s families. But He has also made it clear that although a person might be justified in such action, the greater blessings are reserved for those who endure without taking up arms. See D&C Section 98.

 The account shared by another poster about the German soldier who appeared to the American G.I. to comfort him is instructive. And it is the reason I for one would be loathe to arm myself for purposes  of self-defense or defense of my family, because of my understanding that the release from mortality is a blessing in the end.

Edited July 26, 2019 by Mark Beesley

[Mark Beesley]

16 minutes ago, pogi said:

Yes, there are many willing to put their very lives at risk to defend and protect your rights, religious privileges, and pacifist views (not just gentiles, but saints alike) so that you don’t have to.  They deserve your thanks, but it feels like you are judging them of some terrible sin, and being condescending by calling them “gentiles” when you know that there are righteous saints who serve in the military.

That is rather naïve and idealistic for you to believe the wars today are being waged to protect my freedoms or rights. Wars today are being waged to protect oil, and multinational corporation interests, and all sorts of other unrighteous designs.

Read D&C section 98 before you say that I’m judging people, or laying some terrible sin at their doorstep.  I am simply suggesting a higher way for the covenant people of the Lord. And since I am unqualified to judge whether a person is righteousness or unrighteousness, I cannot say that I know that there are righteous Saints serving in the military. Can you?

Edited July 26, 2019 by Mark Beesley

[Mark Beesley]

14 minutes ago, pogi said:

This is what the church has said about war, and I agree:

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-topics/war?lang=eng

#MeToo

[smac97]

1 hour ago, Mark Beesley said:

Quote

I would be happy to be corrected on this point.  Could you provide a reference for this story?  Is it documented anywhere?  Names?  Locations?  Dates?

If I were to declare that it was confirmed to me by the Spirit, would that be Spirit Manipulation?

I can't speak to that.  All I can do is ask that you provide a reference for this story.  Consider the injury to the Church's reputation, and to individual testimonies, that arose from Paul H. Dunn's fabrications.

Quote

Would the recollection of one of the relations of the slain German have satisfied you? Probably not.

It sure would be a good place to start.  So where is this recollection?

Quote

The point is, it is better to die than to knowingly shed the blood of another Saint, I believe.

So the wartime shedding the blood of a non-member is somehow "less" than the wartime shedding the blood of a fellow member?

I really don't understand your point here.

Quote

The war-related message of the Book of Mormon is that wars solve nothing, a covenant people should rely on the Lord, and it is ok to have non-covenant people wage wars in our defense.

It's also okay to have covenant people wage wars in our defense.  Or are you faulting Captain Moroni?  Mormon?  Moroni?

The lives of our "non-covenant" brothers and sisters in uniform are just as precious to God as our lives are to Him.  To suggest that we should shun military service and send only "non-covenant people" to die in our defense is . . . well, words fail me.

Quote

This is not about whether or not a Saint sins in going to war.

Are you sure?

Quote

The Lord has made it clear that there is no sin in defending one’s families. But He has also made it clear that although a person might be justified in such action, the greater blessings are reserved for those who endure without taking up arms. See D&C Section 98.

I am curious, then, why there has been no discouragement from General Authorities regarding military service (indeed, many of them - including Pres. Nelson, have served in the military).  What are your thoughts about this?

Quote

The account shared by another poster about the German soldier who appeared to the American G.I. to comfort him is instructive. And it is the reason I for one would be loathe to arm myself for purposes  of self-defense or defense of my family, because of my understanding that the release from mortality is a blessing in the end.

As you like.  Meanwhile, I find this apocryphal statement to be apt: People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

You have the luxury of rejecting service in the military (and, I assume, in law enforcement) because there are others who are willing to take up arms and do what you believe your conscience requires you to refuse to do.  I can accommodate your stance and not condemn you for it, but I would hope that you would, in turn, be able to accommodate a stance that honors military and law enforcement service, and that does not condemn those who choose to enter into that service.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited July 26, 2019 by smac97

[Mark Beesley]

8 minutes ago, smac97 said:

. . .People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf. . . .

Wrong, wrong, wrong. I sleep peaceably in my bed at night because . .  oh brother, why bother? Have a nice, peaceable life relying on the violence of rough men.

[USU78]

On 7/25/2019 at 6:47 AM, Stargazer said:

I am reminded that the account (ja, ich habe diese Geschichte auch gehoert) is a complete fabrication.

Now, please explain to me how a POW could be legally executed for theft, and even more to the point how a soldier could even be prosecuted, let alone executed, for disobedience of an order to participate in a firing squad?  There were 95 US soldiers in Europe executed for rape or murder, and one for desertion.  There were no other executions for any other offense, to the best of my knowledge, but I'm pretty confident of this.  

And let's take this a bit further, shall we?  If a Latter-day Saint were to commit murder and be sentenced to death, would it somehow be morally wrong for a Latter-day Saint to flip the switch on the electric chair to execute him?  Or participate in the firing squad? I don't think so.  Or do you disagree?

Life is often, perhaps mostly, tragic.  Unjust suffering is what it is all about, and there's nothing we can do to extirpate it without doing far worse harm.

On a single day, Eve lost two boys.  And things have never gotten better.