Its been fun today

[_Morley]

Mansplain

I sent this article to my each of my daughters. One wrote back thanking me and commenting that this should be called the I-have-a-penis-so-I'm-right argument. Thanks, MsJack.

[_why me]

Mansplain

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Penis envy. :=)

[_Morley]

Looks like a definite "maybe."

I don't condone.... <snip> ....A lot of crap from your counterparts over a hundrend years ago was happening back then.

Who or whom do you see as my 'counterparts over a hundrend years ago'?

[_MsJack]

If you say so. But you did mock the I am a Mormon campaign in that post by bringing in your husband, right?

I mocked certain commercials within the campaign, yes.

(here, here, here and here) over on the other thread that you seem to be hiding from now that your buddies at MDDB failed to rescue you on the temple-marriage-commandment question.

I don't think so. I see the matter has one of opinion.

That's not what you said over on MDDB earlier today:

In the discussion, there isn't any grey. I said that it wasn't a commandment and the others said that it was.

Multiple sources have now been provided to you by myself and calmoriah showing the LDS church teaching that temple marriage is a commandment. Given the black-and-white nature of this issue, do you now retract your erroneous claim that temple marriage is not a commandment and admit that I was right from the start?

The point is Jack is that one can get married outside the temple and be treated as an equal by all concerned.

I disagree, but whether or not my husband is being treated as "an equal by all concerned" was never the subject of my post.

As you mentioned in your mocking post, your husband was never disciplined for marrying outside the temple or for his ear piercing. Why? Because it is not a sin.

The church does not discipline people for every sin they commit. Lack of church discipline =/= "not a sin."

Blixa, Morley, glad you liked the article.

[_Lucretia MacEvil]

I wonder if, had Who Me been a 19th-century Mormon, he would have participated in the rapes of the dead and dying Methodist women in the Fancher party.

Well, I don't know. If I were a Mormon back then, and if I had a couple homes burned down by crazy mobs because of my beliefs and if I lost a wife or child and I was just a little fearful of outsiders because of it because I had experienced trauma for my ordeals who knows just what the mind can do, especially when some antimormons in california were threatening to come out to my area to again burn out the Mormons.

I would hope that I would still have a healthy mind and just mind my own business.

Sometimes people of faith put their trust in their God in times of trouble. But it makes lots more sense to just kill people.

[_why me]

In the discussion, there isn't any grey. I said that it wasn't a commandment and the others said that it wasMultiple sources have now been provided to you by myself and calmoriah showing the LDS church teaching that temple marriage is a commandment. Given the black-and-white nature of this issue, do you now retract your erroneous claim that temple marriage is not a commandment and admit that I was right from the start?

.

Actually there hasn't been much interest about the topic at all. Just a couple of posters responded. I don't think that in the scheme of things, it is not very important. No one really cares. The point is: there is nothing wrong with marrying in the chapel. You could have done this and have all family attending. And most likely being protestant this would have been okay for you and your husband. No one had an interest in a temple marriage anyway and whether or not it is a commandment or not, wouldn't make any difference anyway.

[_why me]

Sometimes people of faith put their trust in their God in times of trouble. But it makes lots more sense to just kill people.

With the links that I posted it seems that antimormonism and the federal government had it in for the Mormons in Utah. All sorts of crap was being printed about the Mormons, stirring up the mobs once more. After being shell shocked in Missouri and in Nauvoo, I may be just a little damaged making the trek to Utah and having fear that it was all starting all over again. The human mind is fragile. But the antimormns have much to blame for the atmosphere at that time likewise for the atmosphere here on this board and on the internet. Nothing has changed much except for the mobs.

[_jon]

Why Me,

Just for clarity:

Is temple marriage a commandment?
Yes [ ]
No. [ ]
(tick the one that applies)

[Guest]

I don't think a single thing I said to you in that other thread was "nasty," let alone "absurd."

Absurd? sure. Nasty, I'd say on the verge. I am saying you contributed by identifying another case when someone was posting stupid stuff. I can't help that you also posted stupid stuff to me on the other thread.

Mansplain it to me a few more times, stemelbow. Maybe then I'll start catering to your distorted sense of entitlement to more of my time.

My goodness this has nothing to do with gender0--weird that you spin it that way (and this, for the record, is another practice in the absurd on your part). I'm merely offering advice--the same type of advice I'd offer to any man if he too was responding with the type of hostile edge that you respond to me with. If you choose to ignore it, cool. I guess I'll just have to deal with and/or read the hostility of MsJack all the more. Not a big deal.

[_stemelbow]

Thank you for just pointing ouut stupid behavior, Stem. It's clear that this is unimportant to you.

you're welcome. I don't know if it means much if most will not acknowledge it and will not be willing to change. I can only hope.