I do not think you will find many people in or out of churches this Sunday (or in or out of mosques this Friday, or in or out of synagogues this Saturday) who will think bcspace's mocking use of images of people born with sub-normal mental capacity and poor physical appearance was 'harmless fun'.
Never Ridicule
I must say this to parents. It is not unusual for foolish children and some very thoughtless adults to make light of the handicapped. The mimicking or teasing or ridiculing of those with handicaps is cruel. Such an assault can inflict deeper pain than can physical punishment—more painful because it is undeserved. It is my conviction that such brutality will not, in the eternal scheme of things, go unanswered, and there will come a day of recompense.
My mother taught us when we were very young that we must never ridicule the unfortunate. Her mother died when she was six. My mother worked in the fields from a very early age. One day some teenagers were picking fruit. One of the girls laughingly mimicked one who suffered from cerebral palsy, saying, “Look who I am,” and she named the handicapped person. They all laughed as she threw herself into a stumbling walk. Suddenly she fell as if struck down. They gathered around her in great fright. Presently she recovered, but there was no more fun at the expense of the handicapped. Mother never forgot what she saw, nor to teach a lesson from it.
Parents, take time in the next home evening to caution your family never to amuse themselves at the expense of the handicapped or of any whose face or form or personality does not fit the supposed ideal or whose skin is too light or too dark to suit their fancy. Teach them that they, in their own way, should become like angels who “move the water,” healing a spirit by erasing loneliness, embarrassment, or rejection.
In Mendoza, Argentina, we attended a seminary graduation. In the class was a young man who had great difficulty climbing ordinary steps. As the class marched in, two strong young classmates gracefully lifted him up the steps. We watched during and after the proceedings, and it became apparent that the whole class was afflicted with a marvelous kind of blindness. They could not see that he was different. They saw a classmate, a friend. In them the works of God were being manifest. While there was no physical transformation in the boy or in his classmates, they were serving like angels, soothing a spirit locked in a deformed body awaiting that time when it would be everlastingly made perfect.
bcspace wrote:Not as fun as seeing antiMormons disagreeing on what is LDS doctrine. Would you like another irony illustration? lol
beastie wrote:Never Ridicule
I must say this to parents. It is not unusual for foolish children and some very thoughtless adults to make light of the handicapped. The mimicking or teasing or ridiculing of those with handicaps is cruel. Such an assault can inflict deeper pain than can physical punishment—more painful because it is undeserved. It is my conviction that such brutality will not, in the eternal scheme of things, go unanswered, and there will come a day of recompense.
My mother taught us when we were very young that we must never ridicule the unfortunate. Her mother died when she was six. My mother worked in the fields from a very early age. One day some teenagers were picking fruit. One of the girls laughingly mimicked one who suffered from cerebral palsy, saying, “Look who I am,” and she named the handicapped person. They all laughed as she threw herself into a stumbling walk. Suddenly she fell as if struck down. They gathered around her in great fright. Presently she recovered, but there was no more fun at the expense of the handicapped. Mother never forgot what she saw, nor to teach a lesson from it.
Parents, take time in the next home evening to caution your family never to amuse themselves at the expense of the handicapped or of any whose face or form or personality does not fit the supposed ideal or whose skin is too light or too dark to suit their fancy. Teach them that they, in their own way, should become like angels who “move the water,” healing a spirit by erasing loneliness, embarrassment, or rejection.
In Mendoza, Argentina, we attended a seminary graduation. In the class was a young man who had great difficulty climbing ordinary steps. As the class marched in, two strong young classmates gracefully lifted him up the steps. We watched during and after the proceedings, and it became apparent that the whole class was afflicted with a marvelous kind of blindness. They could not see that he was different. They saw a classmate, a friend. In them the works of God were being manifest. While there was no physical transformation in the boy or in his classmates, they were serving like angels, soothing a spirit locked in a deformed body awaiting that time when it would be everlastingly made perfect.
Boyd K. Packer
BKPtalk
Boaz & Lidia wrote:by the way, your avatar is very offensive to me Nehor. Please change it.
beastie wrote:The reason this has turned into a dogpile is more due to Nehor than BC. Nehor is doing what Nehor does. He’s simply a variation of a troll. He sticks around longer than a troll, but his purpose is essentially the same. He reminds me of that fool woman who came over here when shades first started this board and talked about boogers all the time. In fact, her name was boogers.
Mister Scratch wrote:beastie wrote:The reason this has turned into a dogpile is more due to Nehor than BC. Nehor is doing what Nehor does. He’s simply a variation of a troll. He sticks around longer than a troll, but his purpose is essentially the same. He reminds me of that fool woman who came over here when shades first started this board and talked about boogers all the time. In fact, her name was boogers.
Unless I'm mistaken, "Boogers" was the MAD stalwart known as MorningStar. She was quite foul-mouthed, If I recall correctly.
Mister Scratch wrote:Unless I'm mistaken, "Boogers" was the MAD stalwart known as MorningStar. She was quite foul-mouthed, If I recall correctly.
Bond...James Bond wrote:Mister Scratch wrote:Unless I'm mistaken, "Boogers" was the MAD stalwart known as MorningStar. She was quite foul-mouthed, If I recall correctly.
For everyone:
How long has this board been online? [in it's various forms]
bcspace wrote:Other than than, it was great fun seeing the garment geeks duking it out.
Not as fun as seeing antiMormons disagreeing on what is LDS doctrine. Would you like another irony illustration? lol
Heroic Monogamy in the Book of Mormon
One thing worth pointing out is just how different the Book of Mormon's overall view of polygamy is from that of the Bible. It is not only among the Lehites that polygamy is an unrighteous practice. Among the Jaredites, it is only the wicked kings who are described as having multiple wives; and among the righteous kings we have a righteous example of monogamy so heroic and absolute as to at least border on the absurd:QUOTE
Ether9:
23 And it came to pass that Coriantum did walk in the steps of his father, and did build many mighty cities, and did administer that which was good unto his people in all his days. And it came to pass that he had no children even until he was exceedingly old.
24 And it came to pass that his wife died, being an hundred and two years old. And it came to pass that Coriantum took to wife, in his old age, a young maid, and begat sons and daughters; wherefore he lived until he was an hundred and forty and two years old.
Here we have a monogamous king who refuses to take a second wife even to raise up seed even unto himself. With his entire dynasty on the line, Coriantum lives monogamously and faithfully with his barren queen until he is well past the age to which he could reasonably have expected to live, and then takes another (singular) wife in his old age, for all of which he is blessed with sons and daughters and the continuation of his kingdom by monogamous means. What kind of king would really have acted so suicidally with respect to his dynasty? Only one absolutely committed to monogamy.
I'd like to note again that the Book of Mormon juxtaposes and opposes monogamy and having "many" wives. There are no descriptions of polygamy in which the wives are not described as number "many." It would appear that for the Book of Mormon one has "one" wife or "many" wives. And Coriantum stayed with the universal Book of Mormon standard of one, when even an additional one was obviously enough to preserve his line.
Don
(Link: http://www.mormonapologetics.org/index. ... 529&st=140 )
Ether 10:5-7:
[5] And it came to pass that Riplakish did not do that which was right in the sight of the Lord, for he did have many wives and concubines, and did lay that upon men's shoulders which was grievous to be borne; yea, he did tax them with heavy taxes; and with the taxes he did build many spacious buildings.
[6] And he did erect him an exceedingly beautiful throne; and he did build many prisons, and whoso would not be subject unto taxes he did cast into prison; and whoso was not able to pay taxes he did cast into prison; and he did cause that they should labor continually for their support; and whoso refused to labor he did cause to be put to death.
[7] Wherefore he did obtain all his fine work, yea, even his fine gold he did cause to be refined in prison, and all manner of fine workmanship he did cause to be wrought in prison. And it came to pass that he did afflict the people with his whoredoms and abominations.