Leftism and the Gospel: How Wide the Divide?

[_Droopy]

As with the U.S. life expectancy statistics, there are any number of key factors that drag a nation's overall ratings down that have nothing whatsoever to do with how many are insured or how the health care system is organized economically.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healt ... rates.html

[_Bond James Bond]

Fishes and loaves. And Jesus duped the apostles into becoming fellow traveling pinkos when he made them collect the leftovers for safe keeping in Marxsalem.

Jesus had a red red beard. He was Irish you know.

[_Themis]

Here we go. Fumes used up.

Quite tame by your standards.

Let see, I source arguments and research that supports my views, and place them against your sources and claims, which argue against mine. Yes, Themis, extreme and dishonest.

Actually some of the sources are, which I have shown with the first one you linked.

I also notice that you think that my sources have an "agenda" and that your sources apparently do not.

Yours are obvious.

Britain and Canada are abysmal, across a number of medical parameters, compared to the U.S and most of the rest of the EU. Those are the empirical facts of the matter

Still waiting for sources.

What this shows is that, sometime beginning around 1989 or so, the U.K. woke up to its abysmal performance since the 50s and took action.

None of these systems are static, and evaluating success and failure is needed to improve them. Same with the US.

All well and good, and there are other shake-ups afoot in the NHS (as there must be, as the entire thing, and the welfare state that supports it, are unsustainable, there, here, and everywhere else.

If they are unsustainable, then the US is in real trouble since more money is spent on it, yet these other countries do better in overall health of the population.

The welfare state is a dead man walking across the Western world, and its only a matter of time before it puts the final nail in the coffin of the world's economic health already devastated by unsustainable and reckless fiat money creation and credit manipulation).

Welfare programs exist in all countries, and even many church's like the LDS church. The purpose is to help others, and if possible to get them to be self sufficient. If a welfare system does not do this then it needs to change. In reality Governments have motivation in this area since more people on welfare means more costs to them and less revenue to pay for it.

Or I could just go your route and point out that the Guardian UK is a notorious leftist echo chamber that agrees with your agenda, and forget the whole thing.

I doubt you even know what my position is on many issues.

[_Buffalo]

Britain and Canada are abysmal, across a number of medical parameters, compared to the U.S and most of the rest of the EU. Those are the empirical facts of the matter
.

If it weren't for ipse dixit, Droopy would have nothing to say about any topic.

[_Darth J]

What happens is someone wants to horde their wealthy and not contribute?

Then they can leave Zion.

See, it's a Hobson's choice, but it isn't compulsory or anything like that.

[_Darth J]

Whether or not there were sexual relations with polyandrous wives in not determinable.

That's my point.

From what I heard in a recent Christmas carol, the Maxwell Institute has the truth of the matter. Let's see what they have to say about whether there is evidence that Joseph Smith had sex with one of his polyandrous wives:


As the table and discussion above show, Joseph was sealed to twenty-one women who were unmarried or widowed. Nearly all indications of sexual relations pertain to these marriages. The table and discussion also show that Joseph was sealed to eight women with an existing marriage. In one marriage, that of Sylvia Sessions Lyon, there was a pregnancy, which, according to family tradition, Sylvia related to the time when her husband "was out of fellowship with the Church" (p. 183). As stated in the above discussion on polyandry, even this is not shown to be a concurrent sexual relationship with two husbands. For the remaining seven sealings of Joseph to married women, there is no reliable evidence that these involved sexual relationships. With one known exception, we know only that the ceremony gave these married women the right to be joined to Joseph Smith in the next world. Sources simply do not show a "marital triangulation" in these cases.

http://maxwellinstitute.BYU.edu/publica ... m=2&id=290

See? So there is evidence that he had sex with Sylvia Sessions Lyon, but that was okay, because her husband was estranged at the time. Adultery is fine if a woman is having problems with her legal husband. I'm sure Ron Lafferty wouldn't mind if his wife separated from him for a while and one of his church leaders had sex with her.

But all the rest above is simple equivocation.

No, its a benefit of the doubt to Joseph grounded in my testimony of him as what he claimed to be.

I think it's great that holding a cherished belief is proof of fact. I'm sure Ron Lafferty would agree that because some people sincerely believe in socialism, the societal benefits of implementing socialism should be given the benefit of the doubt.

These were however considered marriages plain and simple and believing LDS historians would agree with that. Many of the polyandrous wives had husbands they could be sealed to. And in the case of Zina Hunington Jacob BY took her from Henry as a polyandrous wife and fathered a child with her. So there was sex on that one.

There's no convincing evidence that Joseph Smith fathered a child by any of the twelve woman he had sealed to him in ceremonial polyandrous marriages. He does have descendents - all however, from Emma.

And so we see that Joseph Smith was righteous because he failed to follow the purpose of plural marriage the Lord gave in D&C 132.

I eagerly await Ron Lafferty pointing out where D&C 132 authorizes "ceremonial polyandrous marriages."

[_EAllusion]

Contemporary public education is widely understood to have been in a desperate state of intellectual decline for at least several decades, and critically politicized.

Widely understood by who? Public education is as good as it ever has been. This is more a commentary on the low place it was coming from, but in terms of real outcomes children are better educated than they have been in the past. Literacy rates are higher than they were in the 1960's, not lower. What has happened is a gradual decline in US student performance relative to the pace of the rest of the world concentrated primarily in the ares of science and math. Politicization probably plays a role here, though in precisely the opposite way you imagine.

[_Jason Bourne]

This is intriguing. The only time I have seen hospitals willing to treat uninsured without payment up front of part of the cost is in emergency rooms. I assume this was not.

Yes, it was.

So as an uninsured person isn't using the emergency room that by law cannot turn you away a form of forced socialism? If you go there and cannot pay then the cost is passed on to me and others is it not?

When I was a bishop I had uninsured members needing procedure and never would the doctors do work with out payment, again of at least part of the cost of the procedure. My son in law recently needed surgery and he is uninsured. Again no treatment with out money up front.

Try the emergency room. Its the law of the land.

Emergency rooms are ridiculously costly. And it is a horrible way to handle heath care because it is not preventative. One woman I dealt with went to emergency for stomach issues. They stuck and IV in her, did a few minor tests and blood work, decided she needed and endoscopy and they told her to go see a specialist. In other words they did nothing for her and charged $2150 which was never paid. Of course that increases everyone's costs.

Would it not be better for there to be some sort of universal plan at least for those who cannot afford insurance so people can avoid emergency rooms that are so costly? Maybe your wife would have gotten preventative care if you had some sort of insurance.

[_Droopy]

Most of the first dozen of Joseph's wives were already married to other men. Not all of the men knew about it. And at least one of the women testified on behalf of the LDS church that the relationship was sexual. You simply have no idea what you're talking about.

Not even a nice try, Bluffalo.

There is no evidence that ANY of the marriages weren't sexual.

We also have not the slightest evidence that you are not beating your wife or that you have closed down that meth lab in your basement.

Bye.

[_Runtu]

We also have not the slightest evidence that you are not beating your wife or that you have closed down that meth lab in your basement.

Bye.

I thought it was generally accepted by critics and apologists alike that at least some of Joseph Smith's marital relationships had a sexual dimension. I guess it comes down to whether one believes the wives who said they had sexual relations with Joseph Smith. I do.