Calm Posted June 19, 2020 Posted June 19, 2020 1 hour ago, JAHS said: I use my old Mormon Doctrine to raise my monitor up. I wonder which book Elder Bednar is using? Bet it is an old law school textbook because it looks like it is marked on its side with “Bednar” to prevent it from walking off.
Calm Posted June 19, 2020 Posted June 19, 2020 43 minutes ago, Anijen said: Paramount importance does not have to mean it is a right that is supreme over all other rights (your words). I Is there a different legal definition because that is exactly what it means in the regular dictionary. Serious question because I know legal terms don’t always follow general usage just as happens with religious terms at times. google dictionary for paramount: Quote more important than anything else; supreme.
pogi Posted June 19, 2020 Posted June 19, 2020 (edited) 18 minutes ago, Anijen said: “This time of restriction and confinement has confirmed for me that no freedom is more important than religious freedom,” Like I said, selective reading much? "This time...has confirmed to me that no freedom is more important than religious freedom", is very, very, very different from saying "no freedom is more important than religious freedom at this time." You mixing up his words. He also did not preface that religious liberty is paramount among all other rights "at this time". Nor did he do so with the third instance. 18 minutes ago, Anijen said: Really, at no time? Your are misinterpreting Elder Bednar's words (again). You are trying to insert a right enumerated under the Declaration of Independence and say Elder Bednar is stating that enumeration is superior to the right enumerated under the Bill of Rights specifically that the First Amendment is subordinate to the Declaration of Independence. Or I could be wrong, You might be saying that right to life is from the Gettysburg Address because it was said there too. Note: both the Civil War and Revolutionary War were fought at the cost of lives for these freedoms.Yes, Yes, at no time does religious liberty trump right to life. We have the right to defend ourselves if others bring war upon us because of our practice of religion. Edited June 19, 2020 by pogi
Scott Lloyd Posted June 19, 2020 Author Posted June 19, 2020 4 hours ago, pogi said: Elder Bednar stated that religious liberty is "paramount among all other fundamental rights". He stated that there is "no other freedom more important". He stated that we have forgotten what is "most important" while trying to save lives from Covid - religious liberty. You subsequently implored me to take this to mean that he was simply "emphasizing the importance of religious liberty" and not really placing it above the right to life, which quite frankly is "interpreting his meaning differently than as stated". I am sorry if you are offended, but that is what went down. Carefully consider the phrase “more important” and compare it with the phrase “as important.” There is a marked difference in meaning. 1
pogi Posted June 19, 2020 Posted June 19, 2020 (edited) 3 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: Carefully consider the phrase “more important” and compare it with the phrase “as important.” There is a marked difference in meaning. Unfortunately, he clarified his meaning in the other two quotes which you can't ignore. "Paramount" and "most important" is what he said. Edited June 19, 2020 by pogi 1
Scott Lloyd Posted June 19, 2020 Author Posted June 19, 2020 4 hours ago, pogi said: For all intents and purposes, I just described how non-essential entities function. It just goes to show how emotionally triggered people are about being designated as "essential" without considering what that actually means in application. Seems to me that leaving things how they are now would be more favorable for religion in Utah. I agree in equitable treatment for religion, because things are definitely not equitable for religion right now in Utah. They are getting special treatment. I thought the primary distinction was that essential services were allowed to remain functional during quarantines while non-essential ones were not.
Scott Lloyd Posted June 19, 2020 Author Posted June 19, 2020 15 minutes ago, Calm said: Is there a different legal definition because that is exactly what it means in the regular dictionary. Serious question because I know legal terms don’t always follow general usage just as happens with religious terms at times. google dictionary for paramount: Is that what Elder Bednar meant? I saw the word used in the subheading, but the supporting body of text is more along the lines of “no right is more important.” Which leaves room for the assumption that some are AS important.
Scott Lloyd Posted June 19, 2020 Author Posted June 19, 2020 6 minutes ago, pogi said: Unfortunately, he clarified his meaning in the other two quotes which you can't ignore. "Paramount" and "most important" is what he said. Can you cite them verbatim, please?
pogi Posted June 19, 2020 Posted June 19, 2020 1 minute ago, Scott Lloyd said: I thought the primary distinction was that essential services were allowed to remain functional during quarantines while non-essential ones were not. In red phase (when they quarantined business), groups were limited to 10 people and that was limited further to family only. Like I said, for all intents and purposes nothing would change in regard to church. That would make gathering at church impossible.
pogi Posted June 19, 2020 Posted June 19, 2020 1 minute ago, Scott Lloyd said: Can you cite them verbatim, please? I have multiple times in direct quotes. You can scroll back and see for yourself.
Anijen Posted June 19, 2020 Posted June 19, 2020 19 minutes ago, Calm said: Is there a different legal definition because that is exactly what it means in the regular dictionary. Serious question because I know legal terms don’t always follow general usage just as happens with religious terms at times. google dictionary for paramount: That is the correct definition. I have no qualms with it. However, does that mean overtime over different circumstances that what is paramount at one point in time is not as paramount at another point in time? If you look at Elder Bednar's talk he uses the words "at this time....paramount..."
pogi Posted June 19, 2020 Posted June 19, 2020 (edited) 50 minutes ago, Calm said: He said there was a hard cap of 50, so I am assuming that means no more than even if 25% would be 250. I missed that, thanks. They would have to put a cap with mega churches and not base it on percentages. We also are not getting the whole story, he is only comparing restaurants to churches. What are the restrictions on other industries? Are all other non-religious institutions being favored? Is religion really being singled out here? Edited June 19, 2020 by pogi
pogi Posted June 19, 2020 Posted June 19, 2020 (edited) 18 minutes ago, Anijen said: If you look at Elder Bednar's talk he uses the words "at this time....paramount..." Which, again is very different from saying, "paramount at this time" which you are trying to convince me is what he meant to say. But he didn't. Edited June 19, 2020 by pogi
Anijen Posted June 19, 2020 Posted June 19, 2020 3 minutes ago, pogi said: Which, again is very different from saying, "paramount at this time" which you are trying to convince me is what he meant to say. But he didn't. Okay. Elder Bednar is wrong, then you must be right. Heaven forbid I take an Apostle of the Lord seriously. Sorry for inconveniencing your version of his talk. 1
pogi Posted June 19, 2020 Posted June 19, 2020 5 minutes ago, Anijen said: Okay. Elder Bednar is wrong, then you must be right. Heaven forbid I take an Apostle of the Lord seriously. Sorry for inconveniencing your version of his talk. I am taking him at his word. I am only doing what you asked me to do. 1
pogi Posted June 19, 2020 Posted June 19, 2020 I think we have gone about as far as we can go. We simply are not going to agree. Thanks for the interesting discussion. I am sorry if I got a little heated. 1
CA Steve Posted June 19, 2020 Posted June 19, 2020 Funny how we talk about fallible leaders but never allow for the possibility. 1
MustardSeed Posted June 19, 2020 Posted June 19, 2020 (edited) The more I think about this the less comfortable I am. I much prefer the prophets approach- positive, upbeat, smiling, hopeful messages of encouragement. Edited to say that the overall experience I have listening to this speech is his suggestion that the government attacked our options to worship. I disagree and while its indication that government has that power, that's "not' what happened IMO. Edited June 19, 2020 by MustardSeed reasons. 1
Scott Lloyd Posted June 20, 2020 Author Posted June 20, 2020 4 hours ago, pogi said: We are a mostly religious society. Meaning what? That they attend services in a church, synagogue, temple or mosque regularly or that they pay lip service to a supreme being of some sort while being contemptuous of organized religion?
pogi Posted June 20, 2020 Posted June 20, 2020 (edited) 8 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: Meaning what? That they attend services in a church, synagogue, temple or mosque regularly or that they pay lip service to a supreme being of some sort while being contemptuous of organized religion? Meaning that most identify as belonging to an organized religion. I would also be willing to bet that most of those who do not identify that way are not “contemptuous of organized religion”. Edited June 20, 2020 by pogi
Popular Post MiserereNobis Posted June 20, 2020 Popular Post Posted June 20, 2020 On 6/18/2020 at 12:54 AM, Scott Lloyd said: For example, the orders of one state barred Catholic priests from anointing a parishioner with holy oil in the performance of last rites—even if the person was not sick with COVID-19, even if the priest and parishioner were protected with masks and gloves, and even if the oil was applied with a swab. In the same state, my Church could not perform baptisms even under the safest of conditions. This does strike me as draconian, especially if secular interests were getting a pass under comparable conditions and circumstances. That is quite terrible if true. Last rites are very important -- they are one of the 7 sacraments -- and it seems like risk of infection was minimal. That situation seems like a pointed attack on religion and perhaps even Catholicism specifically, if there's not more to the story. My diocese was one of the first to open up, back in mid-April (it made national news). It was small, no more than 5 people in a church at a time, and our Bishop still offered dispensation to remain at home and watch online. He also authorized outdoor Masses in church parking lots, with cars in every other spot and an impromptu altar built. I thought he did a good job of balancing religious needs, health needs, and individual choice. 5
pogi Posted June 20, 2020 Posted June 20, 2020 (edited) 3 hours ago, MiserereNobis said: That is quite terrible if true. Last rites are very important -- they are one of the 7 sacraments -- and it seems like risk of infection was minimal. That situation seems like a pointed attack on religion and perhaps even Catholicism specifically, if there's not more to the story. My diocese was one of the first to open up, back in mid-April (it made national news). It was small, no more than 5 people in a church at a time, and our Bishop still offered dispensation to remain at home and watch online. He also authorized outdoor Masses in church parking lots, with cars in every other spot and an impromptu altar built. I thought he did a good job of balancing religious needs, health needs, and individual choice. I think there is more to the story we are not getting here. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-04-11/last-rites-coronavirus-pandemic-catholics%3f_amp=true It appears that states and the church devised ways to make this possible even when the patient was in a strict isolation ward where family wasn’t even permitted to be with the patient. I would like to see a reliable source for the full story. Edited June 20, 2020 by pogi
pogi Posted June 20, 2020 Posted June 20, 2020 In searching for this story, I found that this is being discussed on reddit. Apparently, I am not the only one that thought this sounded off. I personally don’t think that Elder Bednar would lie about this, but I wonder if he got this off Facebook or something.
sunstoned Posted June 20, 2020 Posted June 20, 2020 7 hours ago, CA Steve said: Funny how we talk about fallible leaders but never allow for the possibility. until they are dead.
CA Steve Posted June 20, 2020 Posted June 20, 2020 13 minutes ago, pogi said: In searching for this story, I found that this is being discussed on reddit. Apparently, I am not the only one that thought this sounded off. I personally don’t think that Elder Bednar would lie about this, but I wonder if he got this off Facebook or something. Even if the story does not prove to be true it was not dunn on purpose.
Recommended Posts