Happy Sunday

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
User avatar
malkie
God
Posts: 1476
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:41 pm

Re: Happy Sunday

Post by malkie »

MG 2.0 wrote:
Mon Sep 26, 2022 10:01 pm
malkie wrote:
Sat Sep 24, 2022 12:18 am

The first big crack in my beliefs came at that time when I realised that I simply didn't miss going to church in the way I thought I would and should. I started searching for what could make me feel that way. My search eventually led me to the website of Richard Packham, a retired teacher & lawyer. It was all downhill from there.
It’s interesting the order that these two things occurred.

Regards,
MG
I get the implication. As I indicated in my comment, I already knew that you and/or others would tell me that, just as I've told other people who were "falling away".

What then? Is it better, when something is not making you happy, to ignore all of the possibilities other than keep going?

That's what LDS missionaries should tell people - if you don't find joy in your current religion, do not look for anything better - stick with your Catholicism, or Evangelicalism, or whatever. People who are leaving Scientology, for example should just stick it out.

Without going into details I can tell you that that realisation came with a heavy cost.

Something else I discovered that was interesting was that it became clear that I was a number, a cog in the machine. I had not been inactive for long when one of the ward leaders came to my home and chewed me out for not keeping up my calling - I was letting the organization down, and they needed to find someone to replace me.

Then several years later the HP group leader told me how sad he had been that I became inactive - I had spoiled the group activity statistics by not attending sacrament meeting or the priesthood class.
You can help Ukraine by talking for an hour a week!! PM me, or check www.enginprogram.org for details.
Слава Україні!, 𝑺𝒍𝒂𝒗𝒂 𝑼𝒌𝒓𝒂𝒊𝒏𝒊!
Jack T
Nursery
Posts: 13
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2022 12:57 pm

Re: Happy Sunday

Post by Jack T »

Res Ipsa wrote:
Mon Sep 26, 2022 3:14 pm
Jack T wrote:
Mon Sep 26, 2022 11:37 am


In the previous week, I listen to five episodes of Mormon stories, the most recent of which was titled race and Mormon scripture. In the first 10 minutes of that show, the guest and John both of whom are white, characterize any person who doesn't have white skin as a marginalized person. Given that John is supposed to be a psychologist, it was really sad to hear. It begs the question of why a certified psychologist would you skin tone to assess marginalization.

In my perspective, if you go through life labeling someone or a group of people as marginalized based on their skin tone in the year 2022, you are no different from the Mormon Church's brethren in the years prior to 1978. John feels justified in his treatment of POC since he operates inside a woke ideological framework. However, racism is racism, regardless of whether someone believes their motivations are good. Isn't telling POC repeatedly that they are marginalized and that white people must assist them in order for them to achieve in 2022 the same as telling black people that they cannot hold the priesthood in 1978?

You made a poor assessment of Mike. He's not even close to being on the far right. His opinions on the LGBT community are a good place to start they are probably more liberal than most here. There's other stuff too.
Hi Jack. “Marginalized” is simply a description. For example, black folks could fairly be described as “marginalized” within the LDS Church before 1978 because the men couldn’t hold any position of authority. The priesthood ban was a rule that discriminated based on race. Marginalized is a word that describes the result of the discriminatory rule.

The rule has been gone for 45 years. If we look at the governance structure of the LDS Church and see it dominated by whites men today in way that is significantly disproportionate to the racial composition of church membership, then we could use the term marginalized to describe non-white folks in terms of church leadership.

But the term “marginalized” Is just a description. What, if anything should be done about it is an entirely different question.
Simplifying the concept of "marginalization" for a person or group is difficult. In reality, 2022s equivalent of physically putting someone in shackles is persuading them that they are a marginalized group in america. Labeling POC is a desperate attempt by the left to maintain their influence and dominance in minority groups, as we are currently experiencing.
User avatar
Doctor Steuss
God
Posts: 1667
Joined: Tue Oct 27, 2020 8:48 pm

Re: Happy Sunday

Post by Doctor Steuss »

Jack T wrote:
Tue Sep 27, 2022 11:36 am
Simplifying the concept of "marginalization" for a person or group is difficult. In reality, 2022s equivalent of physically putting someone in shackles is persuading them that they are a marginalized group in america. Labeling POC is a desperate attempt by the left to maintain their influence and dominance in minority groups, as we are currently experiencing.
Amen.

Just yesterday, someone told me that I deserve more, and I literally felt the binding chains begin to enslave me.
dastardly stem
God
Posts: 2259
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2020 2:38 pm

Re: Happy Sunday

Post by dastardly stem »

Jack T wrote:
Tue Sep 27, 2022 11:36 am

Simplifying the concept of "marginalization" for a person or group is difficult. In reality, 2022s equivalent of physically putting someone in shackles is persuading them that they are a marginalized group in america. Labeling POC is a desperate attempt by the left to maintain their influence and dominance in minority groups, as we are currently experiencing.
How do you understand these drastic effects so well? Also why do you categorize "the left" so succinctly? Is there no diversity of thought and intention amongst those on the left?
“Every one of us is, in the cosmic perspective, precious. If a human disagrees with you, let him live. In a hundred billion galaxies, you will not find another.”
― Carl Sagan, Cosmos
User avatar
canpakes
God
Posts: 7046
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:25 am

Re: Happy Sunday

Post by canpakes »

Jack T wrote:
Tue Sep 27, 2022 11:36 am
Res Ipsa wrote:
Mon Sep 26, 2022 3:14 pm


Hi Jack. “Marginalized” is simply a description. For example, black folks could fairly be described as “marginalized” within the LDS Church before 1978 because the men couldn’t hold any position of authority. The priesthood ban was a rule that discriminated based on race. Marginalized is a word that describes the result of the discriminatory rule.

The rule has been gone for 45 years. If we look at the governance structure of the LDS Church and see it dominated by whites men today in way that is significantly disproportionate to the racial composition of church membership, then we could use the term marginalized to describe non-white folks in terms of church leadership.

But the term “marginalized” Is just a description. What, if anything should be done about it is an entirely different question.
Simplifying the concept of "marginalization" for a person or group is difficult. In reality, 2022s equivalent of physically putting someone in shackles is persuading them that they are a marginalized group in america. Labeling POC is a desperate attempt by the left to maintain their influence and dominance in minority groups, as we are currently experiencing.
Interesting concept. If some sort of assistance is available to someone as a free-will choice, you would see that as equivalent to physically shackling, owning and then trading them to others.

Are you assuming that the folks you have in mind are incapable of making their own decisions regarding assistance, or anything else?
huckelberry
God
Posts: 2556
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 3:48 pm

Re: Happy Sunday

Post by huckelberry »

Jack T wrote:
Tue Sep 27, 2022 11:36 am

Simplifying the concept of "marginalization" for a person or group is difficult. In reality, 2022s equivalent of physically putting someone in shackles is persuading them that they are a marginalized group in america. Labeling POC is a desperate attempt by the left to maintain their influence and dominance in minority groups, as we are currently experiencing.
I have lived a number of years without hearing this picture of things. I am not sure of the dating but it has become popular in right wing speech in recent years. (Perhaps the past 15 ,maybe even twenty years) I do not think it was popular in the twentieth century. Perhaps it takes some training before people will accept the idea. It does not make sense on the face of it. It certainly was not a liberal policy which created ghettos. It was an American policy.

I have a hard time finding a mental location from which to see the theory of liberal control of blacks as valid. Perhaps if one sees blacks as weak willed lazy and easily controlled then the theory makes more sense.
User avatar
Res Ipsa
God
Posts: 9521
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2020 6:44 pm
Location: Playing Rabbits

Re: Happy Sunday

Post by Res Ipsa »

Jack T wrote:
Tue Sep 27, 2022 11:36 am
Res Ipsa wrote:
Mon Sep 26, 2022 3:14 pm


Hi Jack. “Marginalized” is simply a description. For example, black folks could fairly be described as “marginalized” within the LDS Church before 1978 because the men couldn’t hold any position of authority. The priesthood ban was a rule that discriminated based on race. Marginalized is a word that describes the result of the discriminatory rule.

The rule has been gone for 45 years. If we look at the governance structure of the LDS Church and see it dominated by whites men today in way that is significantly disproportionate to the racial composition of church membership, then we could use the term marginalized to describe non-white folks in terms of church leadership.

But the term “marginalized” Is just a description. What, if anything should be done about it is an entirely different question.
Simplifying the concept of "marginalization" for a person or group is difficult. In reality, 2022s equivalent of physically putting someone in shackles is persuading them that they are a marginalized group in america. Labeling POC is a desperate attempt by the left to maintain their influence and dominance in minority groups, as we are currently experiencing.
Hi Jack, just how are you defining "marginalized?" If we are observing a society, what would a marginalized group look like?
he/him
When I go to sea, don’t fear for me. Fear for the storm.

Jessica Best, Fear for the Storm. From The Strange Case of the Starship Iris.
Marcus
God
Posts: 4996
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2021 10:44 pm

Re: Happy Sunday

Post by Marcus »

canpakes wrote:
Tue Sep 27, 2022 4:43 pm
Jack T wrote:
Tue Sep 27, 2022 11:36 am


Simplifying the concept of "marginalization" for a person or group is difficult. In reality, 2022s equivalent of physically putting someone in shackles is persuading them that they are a marginalized group in america. Labeling POC is a desperate attempt by the left to maintain their influence and dominance in minority groups, as we are currently experiencing.
Interesting concept. If some sort of assistance is available to someone as a free-will choice, you would see that as equivalent to physically shackling, owning and then trading them to others.

Are you assuming that the folks you have in mind are incapable of making their own decisions regarding assistance, or anything else?
good question. Big difference between a label someone states and a shackle that physically constrains.
User avatar
canpakes
God
Posts: 7046
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 1:25 am

Re: Happy Sunday

Post by canpakes »

Marcus wrote:
Wed Sep 28, 2022 1:45 am
canpakes wrote:
Tue Sep 27, 2022 4:43 pm


Interesting concept. If some sort of assistance is available to someone as a free-will choice, you would see that as equivalent to physically shackling, owning and then trading them to others.

Are you assuming that the folks you have in mind are incapable of making their own decisions regarding assistance, or anything else?
good question. Big difference between a label someone states and a shackle that physically constrains.
I think that Jack might make a better case if he were to provide an example of someone shackled or otherwise enslaved by being characterized as, say, ‘marginalized’.

Or, from receiving assistance of some kind.
User avatar
Gadianton
God
Posts: 3836
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2020 11:56 pm
Location: Elsewhere

Re: Happy Sunday

Post by Gadianton »

JT wrote:You made a poor assessment of Mike. He's not even close to being on the far right. His opinions on the LGBT community are a good place to start they are probably more liberal than most here. There's other stuff too.
A-mike, what you might have learned in High School English applies to trolling on the Internet. Show, don't tell. Don't tell everyone how fair-minded you are by creating sock puppets that call you "moderate" compared to what the latest sock is. Will used to do the same thing. He pretended to be his wife once, and the wife would tell us how talented and brilliant Will is. lol.

Don't you think it's interesting that in a post where you've taken away any sympathy for the way a person is treated by saying sympathy shackles the person, that you put this effort into throwing a pity party for A-Mike?

On the small chance that you are someone who doesn't live in the same skull as A-mike (or Binger), I'll just inform you that if you were to meet A-mike on the Internet, then you wouldn't care for the guy either. I'm sure in real life he's a decent guy. That's why you like him. We know him from the Internet, that's why most of us don't.
Post Reply