Drifting wrote: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?
Sorry, Drifting. Too many games being played here. This is clearly a distraction and one I don't think needs to be pursued.
Its quite clear, even Toronto and his hostility can agree, that there are at least a few thousand LDS women who have been sealed or who are yet to be sealed who know about the sealing ceremony. Surely DJ, Toronto, Morley have their supporters and the hate will continue to some extent. But, I think the point is clear, even for you. My point is that there are thousands of LDS women who have been sealed or have yet to be sealed, but probably will be at some time, that know about the temple sealing ceremony. Do you agree or disagree on that?
Love ya tons, Stem
I ain't nuttin'. don't get all worked up on account of me.
Drifting wrote: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?
Sorry, Drifting. Too many games being played here. This is clearly a distraction and one I don't think needs to be pursued.
Its quite clear, even Toronto and his hostility can agree, that there are at least a few thousand LDS women who have been sealed or who are yet to be sealed who know about the sealing ceremony. Surely DJ, Toronto, Morley have their supporters and the hate will continue to some extent. But, I think the point is clear, even for you. My point is that there are thousands of LDS women who have been sealed or have yet to be sealed, but probably will be at some time, that know about the temple sealing ceremony. Do you agree or disagree on that?
Stemelbow, this style of avoiding answering people's questions whilst asking one's of your own will probably work on occasion when you go on your mission. Not going to work here though.
How many in your mind is 'many' and how few does there need to be to count as 'few'?
“We look to not only the spiritual but also the temporal, and we believe that a person who is impoverished temporally cannot blossom spiritually.” Keith McMullin - Counsellor in Presiding Bishopric
"One, two, three...let's go shopping!" Thomas S Monson - Prophet, Seer, Revelator
stemelbow wrote: 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.
At what point did you begin to think that hypocrisy would help your cause, stem?
It's sounding more and more like you're pissed that nobody is coming to defend your idiotic comments.
God belief is for people who don't want to live life on the universe's terms.
Drifting wrote:Stemelbow, this style of avoiding answering people's questions whilst asking one's of your own will probably work on occasion when you go on your mission. Not going to work here though.
How many in your mind is 'many' and how few does there need to be to count as 'few'?
Hey if you want to continue your destractions fine by me. Continue on, Drifting. If you don't get my point, then cool. People miss the obvious here all the time. You fit in nicely as a newby.
Love ya tons, Stem
I ain't nuttin'. don't get all worked up on account of me.
Drifting wrote:Stemelbow, this style of avoiding answering people's questions whilst asking one's of your own will probably work on occasion when you go on your mission. Not going to work here though.
How many in your mind is 'many' and how few does there need to be to count as 'few'?
Hey if you want to continue your destractions fine by me. Continue on, Drifting. If you don't get my point, then cool. People miss the obvious here all the time. You fit in nicely as a newby.
Stemelbow, your point included the word 'many'. It seems that a more accurate word would have been 'few'.
I'm just trying to establish whereabouts along this line: 1 person......................................................................1,000,000 people ;you feel it appropriate to label a group 'many'.
It seems that you don't really know.
“We look to not only the spiritual but also the temporal, and we believe that a person who is impoverished temporally cannot blossom spiritually.” Keith McMullin - Counsellor in Presiding Bishopric
"One, two, three...let's go shopping!" Thomas S Monson - Prophet, Seer, Revelator
Some Schmo wrote:At what point did you begin to think that hypocrisy would help your cause, stem?
It's sounding more and more like you're pissed that nobody is coming to defend your idiotic comments.
Everyone will employ hypocrisy from time to time. Think about it. DJ and Toronto say I'm illiterate because the definition of "many" they are using is different from the one contained in the dictionary. uh...is that hypocritical? Sure.
I'm not pissed so much as astounded. I'm astounded. Its quite surprising, Schmoe, when you like to think positively about humanity in general. You think most people will see through the silliness these two posters employ in order to attack an LDS poster and the autistic. When it doesn't happen and the posters here who hate the LDS religion jump on board cheering the hateful statements made about an LDS poster and the autistic, then I get quite astounded. I did not realize that hate and the fostering of hate, as is common among those on this board, will blind people to that extent. Its surprising, Schmoe.
Love ya tons, Stem
I ain't nuttin'. don't get all worked up on account of me.
Drifting wrote:Stemelbow, your point included the word 'many'. It seems that a more accurate word would have been 'few'.
I'm just trying to establish whereabouts along this line: 1 person......................................................................1,000,000 people ;you feel it appropriate to label a group 'many'.
It seems that you don't really know.
But, as is clear, you have been drawn into the trick laid by Toronto to quibble about the nonessentials. To normal folk a few thousand people can be said to be many. I say there are currently a few thousand LDS women who are either sealed in the temple or are yet to be sealed who have known about or do know about the LDS temple sealing previous to their own sealing. I don't care if you wish to think a few thousand is few in number or many. It certainly does not matter to my point.
Love ya tons, Stem
I ain't nuttin'. don't get all worked up on account of me.
stemelbow wrote:I say there are currently a few thousand LDS women who are either sealed in the temple or are yet to be sealed who have known about or do know about the LDS temple sealing previous to their own sealing.
Is this a guess or an estimate based on actual published numbers or based on an extrapolation of your own personal experience with (I think you said) 40 women that you know?
How many women would you say don't know what they will have to dress up in for their sealing ceremony - a few or many?
“We look to not only the spiritual but also the temporal, and we believe that a person who is impoverished temporally cannot blossom spiritually.” Keith McMullin - Counsellor in Presiding Bishopric
"One, two, three...let's go shopping!" Thomas S Monson - Prophet, Seer, Revelator
madeinvoyage wrote:I have heard rumors, and would like to know - it's so conflicting. Is it true that girls don't know what their temple sealings will be like until they're there? Like, what their groom will be wearing too? Or what their vows will consist of?
Most women would not know. In order for them to have seen another temple wedding they would need to be endowed. The church does not usually let women get there endowments unless they are getting married, and usually very close to the date of the wedding, or they are going on a mission. As a result most women will not really know what it will be like.
stemelbow wrote: I'm not pissed so much as astounded. I'm astounded. Its quite surprising, Schmoe, when you like to think positively about humanity in general. You think most people will see through the silliness these two posters employ in order to attack an LDS poster and the autistic. When it doesn't happen and the posters here who hate the LDS religion jump on board cheering the hateful statements made about an LDS poster and the autistic, then I get quite astounded. I did not realize that hate and the fostering of hate, as is common among those on this board, will blind people to that extent. Its surprising, Schmoe.
It would be surprising if it were true.
I know you want to blame you religion for the comments directed your way, but everyone sees that's just you being dishonest with yourself. There are other believers here who don't get nearly as much razzing as you get, and there's a reason.
But you don't want to see that. You'd rather whine about it and blame your religion. It's surprising. Oh well. Pep pep and all that.
God belief is for people who don't want to live life on the universe's terms.