Are LDS brides prepared for what they'll wear in sealings?

[_stemelbow]

I believe them.

Whatever the floats your boat, Morley. Believe whatever you want.

There are too many weirdos here. uh oh...here they go again, whimpering and whining because an LDS person used the term many to describe an uncounted group of people. That LDS guy can't even read stuff, he's so bad. Plus he's autistic.

("yeah", cheers the crowd).

Oh boy..

[_LDSToronto]

I believe them.

Whatever the floats your boat, Morley. Believe whatever you want.

There are too many weirdos here. uh oh...here they go again, whimpering and whining because an LDS person used the term many to describe an uncounted group of people. That LDS guy can't even read stuff, he's so bad. Plus he's autistic.

("yeah", cheers the crowd).

Oh boy..

Nope, it's not the fact that you are LDS, it's the fact that you come across as a complete moron who can't read, can't have a conversation, and can't demonstrate a modicum of reason or rationality in thought.

You've been told this by many people; people who have said it nicely, people who have said it with no punch pulled, but people who are all way smarter than the both of us.

Maybe it's time you listened - you come across as a stupid arsehole, stemelbow, a completely stupid arsehole.

H.

[_Darth J]

I believe them.

Whatever the floats your boat, Morley. Believe whatever you want.

Of all the weapons in the anti-Mormon arsenal, the English language is the most vicious.

There are too many weirdos here. uh oh...here they go again, whimpering and whining because an LDS person used the term many to describe an uncounted group of people. That LDS guy can't even read stuff, he's so bad. Plus he's autistic.

("yeah", cheers the crowd).

Oh boy..

Wait a minute. You were saying that, contrary to common English usage, the word "many" can validly be applied to a raw number of people. Now you are saying you have not even counted them. So let's review your argument:

1. You are purporting to refute the OP by claiming that "many" LDS women know what to expect in a temple sealing ceremony.

2. You think that "many" can validly be used to describe a raw number of something, without comparison between that something and a whole.

3. You are now saying that you used "many" to refer to an "uncounted" number of people. Not only are you not comparing a subset to a whole, now you have abandoned claiming a raw number of people and calling that "many."

4. The dictionary says that "many" means a large number, and "large" means comparing one thing to the greater whole.

5. When (1) is demonstrated to be fatuous, you retreat to stating that everyone is picking on you simply because you are LDS.

By the way, nobody is picking on you because you are LDS. We are picking on you because you are Caucasian. It is not religious bigotry, it is racism. Let's try to keep that straight.

[_schreech]

Nope, it's not the fact that you are LDS, it's the fact that you come across as a complete moron who can't read, can't have a conversation, and can't demonstrate a modicum of reason or rationality in thought.

You've been told this by many people; people who have said it nicely, people who have said it with no punch pulled, but people who are all way smarter than the both of us.

Maybe it's time you listened - you come across as a stupid arsehole, stemelbow, a completely stupid arsehole.

H.

Lol - +1

I would be embarrassed if stem was the online representative of anything I cared about as he, somehow, has the ability to make any issue he takes up look even more ridiculous than I thought possible....I hope to Zeus that he never becomes a "critic" as I certainly don't want to be associated with his idiocy....

[_stemelbow]

Nope, it's not the fact that you are LDS, it's the fact that you come across as a complete moron who can't read, can't have a conversation, and can't demonstrate a modicum of reason or rationality in thought.

This from the guy who thinks the word "many" can't apply to a few thousand people. How dare you use that word appropriately. You are illiterate for doing so. sadly most won't be reasonable enough here to recognize the amount of hate you harbor. This example alone reveals quite a bit. I mean come on. It was a rather harmless comment that was merely contesting the notion that no LDS women have any idea what the sealing is about. If you were able to see clearly, think without the hate you have wrapped yourself in, you'd easily recognize that you're being totally and completely unreasonable here. Instead, you have to act as if you are taking on a noble crusade of personally attacking and hating on an LDS guy here. Purely pathetic behavior. Too bad.

Maybe it's time you listened - you come across as a stupid arsehole, stemelbow, a completely stupid arsehole.

H.

It'd be nice if the posters here listened, toned down their hateful rhetoric, stopped pouting about the most innocuous of things and ceased personal attacks, favoring instead respectful thoughtful dialogue. I'm beginning to think with folks like you domintating this board, it won't happen. Hate and anger rules the day. No wonder where LDS get the general impression that ex-LDS and LDS who really don't believe are so hateful.

[_Drifting]

Stemelbow.

Just to aid clarity on your thinking behind the use of the word 'many'.
How few people can the word 'many' be applied to and still be considered to mean many rather than few?

[_Pollypinks]

I had the crap shocked out of me, mostly because I also had my endowments taken out on that day. Then, my mom and I were shushed by a matronly woman because we broke out laughing at the sight of my dad and my husband to be, dressed up in something you'd wear on stage for some kind of performance. Interesting, because even though mom believed with all her heart, she never did go back to the temple after that, and that was only her second time.

[_stemelbow]

Wait a minute. You were saying that, contrary to common English usage, the word "many" can validly be applied to a raw number of people. Now you are saying you have not even counted them. So let's review your argument:

1. You are purporting to refute the OP by claiming that "many" LDS women know what to expect in a temple sealing ceremony.

You've missed the boat, DJ. Its quite clear, as I've repeated a number of times, the impression given in the posts previous to mine (not just the OP) was that no LDS women knew anything about the sealing ceremony. I am saying there are, have been and will continue to be LDS women who know about it. No one has counted that number, but even the hostile Toronto would agree that it must be somewhere around a few thousand living LDS women who have been sealed who also previous to their sealing knew at least something about the ceremony. In most people's minds, albeit when LDS say it here it will be contested by the masses here and somehow turned into a rant against that LDS poster, a few thousand which no one has counted, can be termed "many". Your link, hilariously, supports my point. But yet in your mind the link somehow says, "in order for the use of many to be valid, the amount in question must make up a significant portion of the whole". but of course your link doesn't say anything of the sort. And, as luck would have it, the concept of “significant portion” plays against your point as well since in some cases 1% could be a significant portion, in others we may have to achieve something around 90% to constitute a significant portion.

2. You think that "many" can validly be used to describe a raw number of something, without comparison between that something and a whole.

It can, of course. Everyone knows that. That is the very definition of “many”. It can be said that there are many people in Wyoming, for instance. I mean there are somewhere around a half a million people that live in that state. You put that group together and you have a large crowd. But in your mind the amount of people in Wyoming could never be said to be many because 500,000 compared to 300,000,000 plus million is so “insignificant”. Try to spin that any way you like and you come off as an idiot.

By the way, nobody is picking on you because you are LDS. We are picking on you because you are Caucasian. It is not religious bigotry, it is racism. Let's try to keep that straight.

Whimper and whine your way out of it if ya like, DJ. Your partners here will surely support the hate and vitriol you spew Sadly your anger and hostility grows to the innocent groups of people too. Ol’ Morley and company all cheer when you mock others it seems. The sad thing is you know you’re pathetic and yet all your partners still champion you as some sort of hero you attacks those who suffer disabilities you probably have no clue about.

[_stemelbow]

Stemelbow.

Just to aid clarity on your thinking behind the use of the word 'many'.
How few people can the word 'many' be applied to and still be considered to mean many rather than few?

What does that matter? You could probably ask 3000 people this question and get 3000 different numbers. Are you saying a few thousand people could not be considered many? I need to understand where you are coming from.

[_Drifting]

Stemelbow.

Just to aid clarity on your thinking behind the use of the word 'many'.
How few people can the word 'many' be applied to and still be considered to mean many rather than few?

What does that matter? You could probably ask 3000 people this question and get 3000 different numbers. Are you saying a few thousand people could not be considered many? I need to understand where you are coming from.

I'm not asking 3,000 people I'm asking you.
I'm asking you what is the smallest number of people that you think the word 'many' can be applied to?