Yahoo Bot wrote:Maybe you ought to just read my response to C.H. Bourne above where I discuss this topic and then you can [one more crack like that and we'll can you].
Just as a heads up, the bracketed text is a yahoo bot joke and not a moderator note.
OK, that made me literally laugh out loud. And taking the joke to the bloody end for a one week ban? Well played Bot. I guess you do have a sense of humor after all.
When you return from your one week hiatus I would still like to know why you think that there will never be horses discovered in America? I have a sneaking suspicion that I know the answer (although I doubt you will admit it on the board) but I would like to hear your thoughts.
It is my province to teach to the Church what the doctrine is. It is your province to echo what I say or to remain silent. Bruce R. McConkie
Yahoo Bot wrote:Maybe you ought to just read my response to C.H. Bourne above where I discuss this topic and then you can [one more crack like that and we'll can you].
Help me out here. Maybe I missed it or I am being a bit slow but whist is the C.H. Preceding Bourne for?
stemelbow wrote:Its morally repugnant when LDS do the same these days, though. I don't think anyone advocates it among LDS. The difference for LDS and Joseph Smith is that to LDS, quite often, Joseph Smith had divine appointment to marry other women. Same with some of the Old Testament folks. Its what it is.
Except it is not morally repugnant for the LDS Church to reflect plural marriage in their temple sealing polices at least for men who are divorced or were sealed to a now deceased woman.
someone can pick whatever facts they choose about a persons life as long as they leave them in order. a persons life might be made up of apples bananas oranges and peaches. the person telling the story may not like oranges and peaches.
only facts count.
the past will be rehashed, no doubt about it.
taking a modern stance on history will always happen and will impact history.
my view on the pyramids, they were power plants and the hyro-gliffs are sanctioned areas where each builder was allowed to etch in stone whatever.
If I ask LDST why having sex with an underage person is wrong, he probably would list reasons like there being a natural imbalance of power being taken advantage of, immature development preventing meaningful consent, and so on. Naturally that's going to apply to both situations.
If you ask BCSpace, however, he might have totally different reasons. Like, God says don't do it. If God says it is Ok, then it is, regardless of age.
This is morally abhorrent, so it's not going to get voiced unless prodded out of him.
Beyond that, there is the affair element. I suppose BCSspace and yahoo bot could try out the Don Bradley argument and say, "But it was a marriage in their eyes." But if I were to sleep with another woman and told my girlfriend "Don't worry baby. We consider ourselves married," I'm betting that isn't going to fly. The broken trust and pain that makes infidelity wrong is still present regardless of marital status.
Again, the issue is why we consider such an act wrong.
EAllusion wrote:Beyond that, there is the affair element. I suppose BCSspace and yahoo bot could try out the Don Bradley argument and say, "But it was a marriage in their eyes." But if I were to sleep with another woman and told my girlfriend "Don't worry baby. We consider ourselves married," I'm betting that isn't going to fly. The broken trust and pain that makes infidelity wrong is still present regardless of marital status.
Again, the issue is why we consider such an act wrong.
No one could say Milk was cheating on his spouse!
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.
Willy Law wrote: OK, that made me literally laugh out loud. And taking the joke to the bloody end for a one week ban? Well played Bot. I guess you do have a sense of humor after all.
When you return from your one week hiatus I would still like to know why you think that there will never be horses discovered in America? I have a sneaking suspicion that I know the answer (although I doubt you will admit it on the board) but I would like to hear your thoughts.
Yes, and I am sure he will come back all dejected saying that I was merely picking on him because he was a TBM, and ignoring the fact that he blatantly broke the rules of the board twice after being asked to refrain from it.
Frankly, I'm looking forward to a peaceful week.
Oh...ETA...we had to add that rule into the Board Rules due to his foolishness to begin with...so this is hardly the first time he has been warned about this.