Nelson reaffirms TK smoothie doctrine that gender is not eternal

[Shulem]

God protects her from the crap that He has to endure.

Again, your apologetic idea is worldly egoism and doesn't belong in the divine arena which you expect to obtain in the hereafter. Sadly, you reduce poor mom to that of the so-called weaker vessel and it's very sexist. It's just another way of keeping women down and maintaining male superiority.

You are a sexist, MG.

[Shulem]

I think her will and her desires are made known. Truthfully? If you or anyone else were to talk about Heavenly Mother in a similar manner that you feel/talk about God/Heavenly Father and Jesus…that would be even MORE disgusting than what we already hear all too often.

Women shouldn’t be treated like that. My wife is treated with respect. I would not think of swearing in her name or swearing at her. Yet, I think, some people would do just that if Heavenly Mother was at the forefront...

You mean like how you treat women here? You're rude to everyone, but you'ved engaged in quite a bit of very specifically sexist rudeness when you know you're speaking to a woman. You wouldn't think of swearing at your wife, but you told me you weren't sure you would be able to refrain from throwing food at me if we met.

MG is a typical Mormon baby boomer who thinks within the realms of sexism whereas the male sex is stronger, whether on earth or in heaven.

But yin and yang are equal!! MG's idea that Heavenly Father "protects her from the crap that He has to endure" is a typical expression of earthly male dominance.

[malkie]

Do I have to search for the post in which you asked someone (Marcus?) if they were male or female so that you would know how to interact with them?

With the complete context of whatever was being said, sure. By the way, have you observed a difference in the way I've interacted with canpakes vs. Marcus? If so, why do you think that is?

And again, any other women on the board you are referring to?

Marcus is indeed, a unique example. She has no intention of actually engaging in a civil and interesting conversation. I've tried to get her to do so too many times to count but she responds and comes back with...well, you know.

Do you not find it kind of weird that she purposefully follows/trolls me around on almost every thread I am trying to have a civil conversation on? That she and IHQ, and sometimes others, will collude and do the 'tag team' thing in order to distract from an important contribution or point being made by 'the opposition' ?

I suppose it's human nature to hear what we want to hear and disregard/twist the rest to protect the cocoons of our own making. Believers and non believers do the same thing. Some are more conscious of the dangers of doing so more than others I suppose.

Regards,
MG

If you were paying attention, I was not talking about anything to do with Marcus vs canpakes. Of course you (and all of us) interact differently with different people. You seem to be muddying the waters here, and trying to justify -- something that has nothing to do with my question.

My point - which I thought was quite obvious - was that you couldn't seem to decide how to treat Marcus(?) without knowing if they were male or female. Is that in dispute?

[Marcus]

If you were paying attention, I was not talking about anything to do with Marcus vs canpakes. Of course you (and all of us) interact differently with different people. You seem to be muddying the waters here, and trying to justify -- something that has nothing to do with my question.

My point - which I thought was quite obvious - was that you couldn't seem to decide how to treat Marcus(?) without knowing if they were male or female. Is that in dispute?

It's not, but mg, as usual, 'wants context.' Here's one example, in full, of a sexist post by the mentalgymnast, to help his memory.

No, it’s people like you who are sexist. Luckily, many are getting past that. Join us!!

So freeranger is sexist. You are past that. So what are you? freeranger referred to you as “buddy”. Are you a buddy? Even if you’re a female who goes by Marcus?

Just trying to put this together.

Join who exactly? What is it you have to offer?

By the way, I’m more than willing to be corrected, but if I’m not mistaken you at one time participated on this board using “Lemmie” as your moniker. Now you have changed your moniker to Marcus. That’s a bit confusing.

Care to explain? I’ve been down this road with you before but have been unsatisfied with your responses. Somewhat evasive.

Lemmie=female. Marcus=male. Are you one, or are you the other? And does this have any relevance to your conversation to freeranger and his views in regards to what you say?

Freeranger should know the contextual framework/position from which you are speaking. He seems to be supportive of the LDS framework in which a man is encouraged to be a man. A leader. An example of goodness and righteousness.

Again, what is it that you are offering to compete with this?

If I’m off base and Lemmie is not Marcus and Marcus is not Lemmie, please correct me.

Regards,
MG

[bolding added, in case mg can't find his own sexism with two hands.] There are more, if mg wants to deny it again.

[MG 2.0]

If you were paying attention, I was not talking about anything to do with Marcus vs canpakes. Of course you (and all of us) interact differently with different people. You seem to be muddying the waters here, and trying to justify -- something that has nothing to do with my question.

My point - which I thought was quite obvious - was that you couldn't seem to decide how to treat Marcus(?) without knowing if they were male or female. Is that in dispute?

It's not, but mg, as usual, 'wants context.' Here's one example, in full, of a sexist post by the mentalgymnast, to help his memory.

So freeranger is sexist. You are past that. So what are you? freeranger referred to you as “buddy”. Are you a buddy? Even if you’re a female who goes by Marcus?

Just trying to put this together.

Join who exactly? What is it you have to offer?

By the way, I’m more than willing to be corrected, but if I’m not mistaken you at one time participated on this board using “Lemmie” as your moniker. Now you have changed your moniker to Marcus. That’s a bit confusing.

Care to explain? I’ve been down this road with you before but have been unsatisfied with your responses. Somewhat evasive.

Lemmie=female. Marcus=male. Are you one, or are you the other? And does this have any relevance to your conversation to freeranger and his views in regards to what you say?

Freeranger should know the contextual framework/position from which you are speaking. He seems to be supportive of the LDS framework in which a man is encouraged to be a man. A leader. An example of goodness and righteousness.

Again, what is it that you are offering to compete with this?

If I’m off base and Lemmie is not Marcus and Marcus is not Lemmie, please correct me.

Regards,
MG

[bolding added, in case mg can't find his own sexism with two hands.] There are more, if mg wants to deny it again.

OK. I remember that particular exchange. Honestly? I’m still confused. Why Marcus rather than Lemmie? Is Marcus considered to be a male or female name? I was questioning it then and still do. To me, it sounded/sounds like there was/is some gender dysphoria involved. I am more than happy to be corrected but all I had/have to go on was a change that seemed to be an indication of transitioning of some kind. I suppose all you need to do is make a simple clarification and designation as to whether ‘Marcus’ is a female name or male name.

Again, I’m open to explanation. I was questioning then and the question hasn’t gone away. Also, I’m not sure why the fact that I haven’t been able to completely resolve this rather interesting change from a female to male name is considered to be “sexist”.

My words to you over time have been directed at a ‘person’ that I see as an almost cardboard cutout, not unlike IHQ, of someone who is unable and/or unwilling to reason/think outside of a self constructed box of dogmatic atheism. Folks like you, male or female, I admit are a bit beyond my understanding so I might at times be a bit ‘what the heck’ in reference to what I see as a very restricted worldview. I suppose that may come across.

As I’ve mentioned I went through a period of time years ago where I would have considered myself to be agnostic/atheist but after a period of time I saw that this seemed to be an unreasonable position to take as a dogmatic position with no wiggle room. I do have more respect, granted, for those that are humble enough to know that they don’t know everything and are at least OPEN to the idea of a creator God. So any lack of respect is not due to your sexuality or sexual preferences, per se, but your adamant position that seems to be obvious behind almost all that you say. That is, “I don’t believe in God”. That you are stuck there is a constant remainder of how stubborn the human intellect can be when one becomes self absorbed in one’s own puny abilities to determine ultimate truth.

Those of us that live by faith…do just that. Live by reasoned faith and belief. Are you sure in your knowledge that there is no creator God?

Regards,
MG

[Shulem]

I do have more respect, granted, for those that are humble enough to know that they don’t know everything and are at least OPEN to the idea of a creator God.

Well, that would be me. I AM one who has personal beliefs in a creator God. So do I get some respect (points?) to the idea of believing in God and how much or many points do you care to reward me?

Check the box:

[ ] 1
[ ] 2
[ ] 3
[ ] 4
[ ] 5
[ ] 6
[ ] 7
[ ] 8
[ ] 9
[ ] 10

Those of us that live by faith…do just that. Live by reasoned faith and belief.

And your faith in God is wholly determined on what your Church tells you to believe. I don't live by faith or have faith in church/religion that tells me what I have to believe in. I walk by the intelligence of my own mind (GOD) and am blessed with a fullness of intuition, inspiration, and instinct that gives me great joy in walking through my life's journey, which I have done many times before as an incarnated being in other worlds, having experienced being male in some places and female in others. I like the variety! I have been all things and continue as is. I believe you have been doing somewhat the same as you lived before life many times. But it would help you to come in touch with your more feminine side here in this life before it ends. Karma baby.

Amen

[Marcus]

It's not, but mg, as usual, 'wants context.' Here's one example, in full, of a sexist post by the mentalgymnast, to help his memory.

[bolding added, in case mg can't find his own sexism with two hands.] There are more, if mg wants to deny it again.

OK. I remember that particular exchange. Honestly? I’m still confused. Why Marcus rather than Lemmie? Is Marcus considered to be a male or female name? I was questioning it then and still do. To me, it sounded/sounds like there was/is some gender dysphoria involved. I am more than happy to be corrected but all I had/have to go on was a change that seemed to be an indication of transitioning of some kind. I suppose all you need to do is make a simple clarification and designation as to whether ‘Marcus’ is a female name or male name.

Again, I’m open to explanation. I was questioning then and the question hasn’t gone away. Also, I’m not sure why the fact that I haven’t been able to completely resolve this rather interesting change from a female to male name is considered to be “sexist”.

My words to you over time have been directed at a ‘person’ that I see as an almost cardboard cutout, not unlike IHQ, of someone who is unable and/or unwilling to reason/think outside of a self constructed box of dogmatic atheism. Folks like you, male or female, I admit are a bit beyond my understanding so I might at times be a bit ‘what the heck’ in reference to what I see as a very restricted worldview. I suppose that may come across.

As I’ve mentioned I went through a period of time years ago where I would have considered myself to be agnostic/atheist but after a period of time I saw that this seemed to be an unreasonable position to take as a dogmatic position with no wiggle room. I do have more respect, granted, for those that are humble enough to know that they don’t know everything and are at least OPEN to the idea of a creator God. So any lack of respect is not due to your sexuality or sexual preferences, per se, but your adamant position that seems to be obvious behind almost all that you say. That is, “I don’t believe in God”. That you are stuck there is a constant remainder of how stubborn the human intellect can be when one becomes self absorbed in one’s own puny abilities to determine ultimate truth.

Those of us that live by faith…do just that. Live by reasoned faith and belief. Are you sure in your knowledge that there is no creator God?

Regards,
MG

Lol. The fibber gymnast writes a huge amount of nonsense words trying to justify his sexism. Not only did he fail but he added more sexism. That's what trolling mental gymnasts do.

[Marcus]

I do have more respect, granted, for those that are humble enough to know that they don’t know everything and are at least OPEN to the idea of a creator God.

Well, that would be me. I AM one who has personal beliefs in a creator God. So do I get some respect (points?) to the idea of believing in God and how much or many points do you care to reward me?

Check the box:

[ ] 1
[ ] 2
[ ] 3
[ ] 4
[ ] 5
[ ] 6
[ ] 7
[ ] 8
[ ] 9
[ ] 10

Those of us that live by faith…do just that. Live by reasoned faith and belief.

And your faith in God is wholly determined on what your Church tells you to believe. I don't live by faith or have faith in church/religion that tells me what I have to believe in. I walk by the intelligence of my own mind (GOD) and am blessed with a fullness of intuition, inspiration, and instinct that gives me great joy in walking through my life's journey, which I have done many times before as an incarnated being in other worlds, having experienced being male in some places and female in others. I like the variety! I have been all things and continue as is. I believe you have been doing somewhat the same as you lived before life many times. But it would help you to come in touch with your more feminine side here in this life before it ends. Karma baby.

Amen

Amen, baby, amen!!!!

[MG 2.0]

OK. I remember that particular exchange. Honestly? I’m still confused. Why Marcus rather than Lemmie? Is Marcus considered to be a male or female name? I was questioning it then and still do. To me, it sounded/sounds like there was/is some gender dysphoria involved. I am more than happy to be corrected but all I had/have to go on was a change that seemed to be an indication of transitioning of some kind. I suppose all you need to do is make a simple clarification and designation as to whether ‘Marcus’ is a female name or male name.

Again, I’m open to explanation. I was questioning then and the question hasn’t gone away. Also, I’m not sure why the fact that I haven’t been able to completely resolve this rather interesting change from a female to male name is considered to be “sexist”.

My words to you over time have been directed at a ‘person’ that I see as an almost cardboard cutout, not unlike IHQ, of someone who is unable and/or unwilling to reason/think outside of a self constructed box of dogmatic atheism. Folks like you, male or female, I admit are a bit beyond my understanding so I might at times be a bit ‘what the heck’ in reference to what I see as a very restricted worldview. I suppose that may come across.

As I’ve mentioned I went through a period of time years ago where I would have considered myself to be agnostic/atheist but after a period of time I saw that this seemed to be an unreasonable position to take as a dogmatic position with no wiggle room. I do have more respect, granted, for those that are humble enough to know that they don’t know everything and are at least OPEN to the idea of a creator God. So any lack of respect is not due to your sexuality or sexual preferences, per se, but your adamant position that seems to be obvious behind almost all that you say. That is, “I don’t believe in God”. That you are stuck there is a constant remainder of how stubborn the human intellect can be when one becomes self absorbed in one’s own puny abilities to determine ultimate truth.

Those of us that live by faith…do just that. Live by reasoned faith and belief. Are you sure in your knowledge that there is no creator God?

Regards,
MG

Lol. The fibber gymnast writes a huge amount of nonsense words trying to justify his sexism. Not only did he fail but he added more sexism. That's what trolling mental gymnasts do.

Your response is just one more reason I don’t take you seriously. And it has NOTHING to do with whether you’re male or female. And nothing to do with sexism. You are entrenched in some kind of tiny little world view that, admittedly, it is hard for me to understand. And apparently you are not willing to open up in response to my last post.

Regards,
MG

[Shulem]

Why were Shulem's comments not condemned?

And those comments rightly could be condemned because they were offensive, nasty, and over the top. But a point has been made!

Now, how about condemning the Facsimiles of the Book of Abraham? I mean talk about all things that offend! It makes a solid mockery of the Egyptian religion and pays no proper mind or respect to sex, position (no pun intended), and origin.

The Explanations of the Facsimiles are condemned by the entire world in which Mormonism is just a tiny bubble within the world which just can't seem to come to grips with telling the truth and admitting the errors of its ways.

Wouldn't you say, MG? Don't you want to be an honest man? It seems not.