LDS Freedom Forum

Ok, so I emailed my uncle (who is a Romney supporter) and asked him about the Marriot Hotel chain and their policy of having a BOM in each room and selling porn on each TV. I reminded him that the Marriots are LDS and that Mitt was on the board of directors of Marriot Corp. I asked him why supposedly good members of the church would promote something as evil as porn and asked him to explain this. Id like all your feedback on this. Here is his answer to my question:

Marc. I knew that was your point. You might be a little naive in this area though I’m sure you don’t think so. Years ago we lived in Texas. We were building a new chapel. As a fund raiser we sold Christmas trees. Sunday was the busiest day. We concluded after counseling with our Stake Preside that we would sell them on Sunday as well. We were taking money from the gentiles to help further the Lords work here on earth. If you’re going to compete in business then you have to provide the merchandise the customers want. Would you open a grocery store in LA or Las Vegas and not sell alcohol or cigarettes? Or other items that we do not believe in? Same goes for Hotels. Customers have a choice and that’s the gospel plan.

So hes saying in essence that as long as customers demand something (immoral or not) its ok for mormons to sell it!

Do he and I even belong to the same church? Havent we been told that we must earn our living in an honorable way? What am I missing here????

That is why he is rich and we are not ... moral limit how much money we make. Moral decisions will all but guarantee that we be no higher than middle class

Good point. My uncle is well to do and has ran businesses. Hes a millionaire. Does anyone know of any teachings from lds leaders that condemn "blood money" profits?

yes, i simply refer you back to the Mariott smutt pedler thread we had

its all in there

very good observation AlbertaB. very true

the question is also asked in the threads on tithing- does the church accept tithing from sources ti knows not too good

a fe points to throw in

cigarettes are a word of wisdom issue. WE lds abide by this, the world has not made that covenent. this is a poor example in the porn context, a better one is selling heroin. clearly you can't, because it is illegal, but in some countries it may not be, for instance what if you are a producer of poppies in afghanistan? that snot illegal. but it is in the USA. slippery ground here

lets reverse it. porn is LEGAL in the USA< but illegal in many countries (like those sharia moslem countries eh oldmandalton). so what is the guide? legality or morality?

id say for LDS its morality.

but then the church made very good money selling stuff to cross country settlers, im sure we will get the quote from brigham young in relation to profiting from non LDS.

i found the use of the word Gentile in the letter predictable, but utterly abhorrent. it is like reading Goy in Talmudic/ Jewish literature. It is usually a context of a slur against gods children not like us, used to justify exploiting them

dallin Oaks wrote well about how porn is more damaging to our body and soul than the hardest drugs and we should have NO part in any part of the industry. someone will give you the quote or just go to the Marriott/ Porn thread

i'd say it is accepted, but not acceptable. it is a sore point for me. Marriott is the poster boy. he says it is legal and their franchisees control it and he is contracted to play it, but that is a lie, they can ban smoking they can replace the movies

if they signed a contract then they should pay for the mistake

but then he is a GA, and in will come the comment about speaking evil of the lords anointed (which ignores that we are all his anointed equally here) so i wont comment on him other than to say Billionaires have their reward, but i don't believe king benjamin- a man we should style our lives after- would care what the church thinks,. he would only care what god thinks.

and what do we all think God thinks about making money from the pornography industry?

(hint: if you make money from it, YOU. ARE. IT)

Porn is exploitation of vulnerable women and prays on innate desires in men. it_can_destroy relationships and is a pox on our society. it teaches young boys and girls incorrect messages about their own sexuality and human physical relationships.

it is most certainly NOT ok to sell porn

what "the church" (read: people) think about it is irrelevant. in 10 years time the church might think its okay to have openly gay men on bishoprics. oh wait

Just because this is the Lords Church doesn't mean the members have got a clue, me inclueded

Good post AUSSIE, my sentiments exactly!

More to the point, I wish our members wouldn't use porn. If there wasn't a market for it, no one would sell it. And if you do use porn, you really don't have a right to judge those that sell it. I do agree that you shouldn't sell it. But I leave it up to the church to decide what to do about it. They are very aware of what is offered and who is selling it and what their status is as members.

This is a sad explanation. First of all, the Lord's cause is not promoted by fund-raisers or selling a greater number of Christmas trees, it is promoted by righteousness. The Lord needs nothing for His work to go forward. We have a tradition in the church that "the Lord needs rich men." That is false. The Lord needs pure men. Second of all, who are the Gentiles? Are they those bad people who aren't members of the Church? Of course not. Read Joseph Smith's dedicatory prayer of the Kirtland temple and 1 Nephi 13 and then tell me who the Gentiles are. That being said, I'm in the military. My employer is in the business of killing, and I worry about that quite a bit. All of this being said, we aren't the judges as to whether it is right or wrong except for ourselves. I personally feel it would be wrong to profit from pornography, but those who are on any hotel board of directors have to make that decision for themselves. Obviously God does have an opinion, but it's not for me to dictate that to someone else.

p51-mustang wrote:Ok, so I emailed my uncle (who is a Romney supporter) and asked him about the Marriot Hotel chain and their policy of having a BOM in each room and selling porn on each TV. I reminded him that the Marriots are LDS and that Mitt was on the board of directors of Marriot Corp. I asked him why supposedly good members of the church would promote something as evil as porn and asked him to explain this. Id like all your feedback on this. Here is his answer to my question:

Marc. I knew that was your point. You might be a little naive in this area though I’m sure you don’t think so. Years ago we lived in Texas. We were building a new chapel. As a fund raiser we sold Christmas trees. Sunday was the busiest day. We concluded after counseling with our Stake Preside that we would sell them on Sunday as well. We were taking money from the gentiles to help further the Lords work here on earth. If you’re going to compete in business then you have to provide the merchandise the customers want. Would you open a grocery store in LA or Las Vegas and not sell alcohol or cigarettes? Or other items that we do not believe in? Same goes for Hotels. Customers have a choice and that’s the gospel plan.

So hes saying in essence that as long as customers demand something (immoral or not) its ok for mormons to sell it!

Do he and I even belong to the same church? Havent we been told that we must earn our living in an honorable way? What am I missing here????

The Church itself has a history of doing this sort of thing- offering something that we believe to be immoral to partake of (read: alcohol) for the sake of making money. IIRC, there was a bar in the basement of the Joseph Smith Memorial Building- that's how they paid off its elaborate cost.

That being said, there is a difference between selling some kinds of alcohol (which technically isn't immoral to partake of if you're not LDS) and selling pornography (which is 100% immoral to everyone, all the time).

Another example of local church leaders and individual church members making poor choices. Not surprising, given the awful state of the children of Zion at the moment.

Is it proven that Mitt voted in favor of offering pornogarphy at the Mariott hotels?

p51-mustang wrote:Ok, so I emailed my uncle (who is a Romney supporter) and asked him about the Marriot Hotel chain and their policy of having a BOM in each room and selling porn on each TV. I reminded him that the Marriots are LDS and that Mitt was on the board of directors of Marriot Corp. I asked him why supposedly good members of the church would promote something as evil as porn and asked him to explain this. Id like all your feedback on this. Here is his answer to my question:

Marc. I knew that was your point. You might be a little naive in this area though I’m sure you don’t think so. Years ago we lived in Texas. We were building a new chapel. As a fund raiser we sold Christmas trees. Sunday was the busiest day. We concluded after counseling with our Stake Preside that we would sell them on Sunday as well. We were taking money from the gentiles to help further the Lords work here on earth. If you’re going to compete in business then you have to provide the merchandise the customers want. Would you open a grocery store in LA or Las Vegas and not sell alcohol or cigarettes? Or other items that we do not believe in? Same goes for Hotels. Customers have a choice and that’s the gospel plan.

So hes saying in essence that as long as customers demand something (immoral or not) its ok for mormons to sell it!

Do he and I even belong to the same church? Havent we been told that we must earn our living in an honorable way? What am I missing here????

The explanation you received is both diabolical and incorrect. I think if you look into it further you will find that when the hotels sign a contract for cable in hotel rooms they are forced to make porn stations available. In that case, they have a choice, either no TV in their hotel, or make the porn available. Given the choices, I think that I would look for another way to make a living. Perhaps legislation can be passed to prohibit this type of arrangement.

I don't understand how anyone can sell alcohol or cigarettes, especially Latter-day Saints. How are they different from the leaders of drug cartels that don't use their own products?

I don't know the details of how porn became part of the Marriott hotels and I bet nobody here does either. Was Mitt for or against it? Are there any records proving it either way?


"If you do not accuse each other, God will not accuse you. If you have no accuser you will enter heaven, and if you will follow the revelations and instructions which God gives you through me, I will take you into heaven as my back load. If you will not accuse me, I will not accuse you. If you will throw a cloak of charity over my sins, I will over yours for charity covereth a multitude of sins. What many people call sin is not sin;" TPJS Pg. 193

"We can seek for the bad in others. Or we can... extend to others the understanding, fairness, and forgiveness we so desperately desire for ourselves. It is our choice; for whatever we seek, that we will certainly find."
-Pres. Uchtdorf


On a side note, does anyone know who opened the first bar in Utah?

=p~

#-o

Okay, to clarify the hotel and porn connection I would suggest you watch the documentary "American Porn." The section entitled "The Happy Alliance" is a great eye-opener on how corporations have MAINSTREAMED porn into American culture. Here is the link here: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline ... porn/view/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; I will note that there is a parental advisory on the documentary but it has played on PBS and is produced by Frontline. It is not pornographic but it lays out how porn is big business today.

As for a commentary on this issue here is one from Russia Today in regards to Mitt: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTvaGzkOjl0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I will note that I find it interesting how some members will go to extreme lengths to justify the issue of hotel porn yet would have a fit if you presented justifications for an individual using it. If I were a 16 year old being kicked off the computer for accessing a naughty video I would pull the Marriott issue immediately. Sad part is many parents would find a reason why the teen was doing something evil while the corporation is justified for its actions.

chasetafer0707 wrote:… I personally feel it would be wrong to profit from pornography, but those who are on any hotel board of directors have to make that decision for themselves. Obviously God does have an opinion, but it's not for me to dictate that to someone else.

I couldn't have said it better myself. I think this video is applicable to most of this thread.

Marriott corp recently decided to stop selling porn starting in 2013. I find it interesting that they say that couldn't stop the porn from being shown but now they say they made the decision to stop it. If they can stop it in 2013 then why couldn't they stop it in 2005 or even chosen to never sell it in the first place?

If it was my son watching porn I would be very unhappy with him and we would be working with him. I don't care so much of the souls of strangers as I do for my children. And someone isn't repentant if they offer excuses or try to say what someone else is doing is worse. Doesn't matter what other people are doing. We aren't judged on a curve. We are judged by what we know and what we do with it.

“Brother’s Keeper”
Elder Dallin H. Oaks
Of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles


One of the consequences of mortality is the necessity of earning our daily bread (see Gen. 3:19; Moses 4:25). We do so as employees, as business people, and as investors. In all of our earning activities, we have the challenge of dealing fairly and considerately with others.

Our duty is clear. The Savior gave us the Golden Rule: “All things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them” (Matt. 7:12).

Satan’s position is the opposite. He sponsors self-interest, raw and unrefined by any other consideration. One of his most effective tools is the temptation to take unfair advantage in order to get gain. It has been so from the beginning.

Cain set the pattern of the world. Cain coveted the flocks of his brother Abel, and Satan showed him how to obtain them (see JST, Gen. 5:14, 23; Moses 5:29, 38). Satan taught Cain that a man could get worldly wealth by committing some evil against its owner (see JST, Gen. 5:16; Moses 5:31).

Cain killed Abel. The scriptures say that he did so “for the sake of getting gain” (Moses 5:50), the flocks of his brother (JST, Gen. 5:18; Moses 5:33). Seeing this, the Lord asked Cain, “Where is Abel thy brother?” Cain first attempted to cover his sin with a lie: “I know not.” Then he added a rationalization: “Am I my brother’s keeper?” (Gen. 4:9; Moses 5:34).

Are we our brothers’ keepers? In other words, are we responsible to look after the well-being of our neighbors as we seek to earn our daily bread? The Savior’s Golden Rule says we are. Satan says we are not.

Tempted of Satan, some have followed the example of Cain. They covet property and then sin to obtain it. The sin may be murder, robbery, or theft. It may be fraud or deception. It may even be some clever but legal manipulation of facts or influence to take unfair advantage of another. Always the excuse is the same: “Am I my brother’s keeper?”

Those who follow the example of Cain fulfill a Book of Mormon prophecy. Seeing our day, Nephi prophesied that many would say, “Lie a little, take the advantage of one because of his words, dig a pit for thy neighbor; there is no harm in this” (2 Ne. 28:8).

We live in a world where many look on the marketplace as a ruthless arena where the buyer must beware, where no one is obligated to do more than the law requires, and where fraud isn’t fraud unless you can prove it in court.

Members of the Church of Jesus Christ have a higher standard. President Harold B. Lee said, “The standard … in the Church must be visibly higher than the standard … in the world” (Ye Are the Light of the World, Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1974, p. 13). We are commanded to live the Golden Rule.

Despite that high standard, some who profess to be Christians seek to earn their living by systematically victimizing their neighbors.

Some seize wealth by trafficking in illegal drugs or pornography. Traders in these products enrich themselves by transactions that ruin the bodies, minds, or morals of their customers.

Other criminals live by stealing. And not all stealing is at gunpoint or by dark of night. Some theft is by deception, where the thief manipulates the confidence of his victim.

The white-collar cousin of stealing is fraud, which gets its gain by lying about an essential fact in a transaction.

Scheming promoters with glib tongues and ingratiating manners deceive their neighbors into investments the promoters know to be more speculative than they dare reveal.

Difficulties of proof make fraud a hard crime to enforce. But the inadequacies of the laws of man provide no license for transgression under the laws of God. Though their method of thievery may be immune from correction in this life, sophisticated thieves in white shirts and ties will ultimately be seen and punished for what they are. He who presides over that Eternal Tribunal knows our secret acts, and he is “a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart” (Heb. 4:12; D&C 33:1).

Most of us can be relatively comfortable when a message on the Golden Rule in the workplace uses examples like illegal drugs and theft by deception. What follows is more challenging. And it should be. We cannot expect to be comfortable if we measure our conduct against the Savior’s command, “I would that ye should be perfect even as I” (3 Ne. 12:48). To follow in the footsteps of the only perfect person who ever lived, we must expect to stretch our souls.

Followers of Christ have the moral responsibility of earning their livings and conducting their financial transactions in ways that are consistent with the principles of the gospel and the teachings of the Savior. Members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints should not be involved in employment or other activities upon which they cannot conscientiously ask the blessings of the Lord.

Persons who prosecute frivolous lawsuits do not measure up to this high standard. Groundless litigation rewards some plaintiffs handsomely, but it injures everyone else by raising the price of products and services.

An employee who receives the compensation agreed upon but does not perform the service agreed upon earns part of his living by injuring others.

So does an employer who is unfair to his employees. An idealistic young professional wrote Church headquarters about the plight of migrant farm workers. He had observed treatment that was probably illegal and certainly unchristian. When I read his letter, I thought of the positive example of Jesse Knight, the great benefactor of Brigham Young Academy. At a time when most mine owners exploited their workers, this Christian employer paid his miners something extra so they could earn their living in six days’ labor and rest on the Sabbath. He did not require them to patronize a company store. He built his workers a building for recreation, worship, and schooling. And Brother Knight would not permit the superintendent to question his workers about their religion or politics (see Jesse William Knight, The Jesse Knight Family, Salt Lake City: Deseret News Press, 1940, pp. 43–44; and Gary Fuller Reese, “Uncle Jesse,” master’s thesis, Brigham Young University, 1961, pp. 26–28).

Of course, we understand that what an employer can pay his employees is limited by what his business can obtain for its products or services in a competitive marketplace. Contracts also impose limits on legitimate economic expectations.

Christian standards should also apply to those who earn a living by selling or advertising products in the marketplace.

The marketplace for products and services has many potential buyers who are vulnerable because they are poorly informed or excessively trusting. For example, a friend told me of a young student couple who didn’t have enough money for rent, groceries, and tuition but were persuaded to sign up for an expensive self-improvement course. Can a seller ever justify obtaining personal profit by persuading someone to assume a financial burden he cannot wisely bear in order to acquire something he does not really need? The Prophet Joseph Smith taught that Latter-day Saints should deal justly with their neighbors and mercifully with the poor (see History of the Church, 5:401).

To cite another kind of example, an owner who keeps his business open on Sunday prevents his employees from attending worship services and being with their families on the Sabbath. Modern-day prophets have encouraged us not to shop on Sunday (see, for example, Spencer W. Kimball, Ensign, Nov. 1974, p. 6). Those of us who shop on the Sabbath cannot escape responsibility for encouraging businesses to remain open on that day. Essential services must be provided, but most Sabbath transactions could be avoided if merchants and customers were determined to avoid doing business on the Lord’s day.

Last year the Deseret News carried an article about a Salt Lake City pharmacist who stopped selling cigarettes in his drugstore. He explained, “It’s just incompatible for a profession dedicated to saving people’s lives to sell a product that does nothing but kill” (20 Dec. 1985, p. B1). That merchant was more concerned about his customers’ welfare than his personal profits.

Sister Oaks called my attention to a similar example in the world of advertising. The magazine Women’s Sports and Fitness does not accept cigarette ads, thus foregoing much-needed revenue. A woman columnist and physician, Dr. Joan Ullyot, praised this policy and contrasted it to the practice of another organization:

“I am dismayed that a prominent women’s sport, tennis, continues to take support from a cigarette company. Surely the top women in this sport, none of whom smoke, have the [courage] to say no to this hypocrisy and stop lending their names and prestige to sanction and glamorize a lethal product. Any role model in sport who accepts support or sponsorship from a company whose products destroy health and fitness should take a hard look at what she is, by association, endorsing” (Women’s Sports and Fitness, Sept. 1986, p. 12).

Wouldn’t it be wonderful if this same attitude of looking after the interests of others governed Latter-day Saints who are making a profit from the sale or promotion of alcoholic beverages? Consider the terrible effects of alcohol. Alcohol-related accidents are the leading cause of death of those under twenty-five. The physical, social, and financial effects of alcohol ruin marriages and family life. By dulling inhibitions, alcohol leads to untold numbers of crimes and moral transgressions. Alcohol is the number one addictive drug in our day.

The consumption of alcohol is increasing among youth. Targeting young audiences, advertisers portray beer and wine as joyful, socially desirable, and harmless. Producers are promoting new types of alcoholic beverages as competitors in the huge soft-drink market. Grocery and convenience stores and gas stations stock alcoholic beverages side by side with soda pop. Can Christians who are involved in this commerce be indifferent to the physical and moral effects of the alcohol from which they are making their profits?

Other examples could be given, but these few are sufficient to illustrate the principle that the Golden Rule applies to our earning activities. We are our brother’s keeper, even in the marketplace.

I am aware that this is a high standard which cannot be met overnight. But it is important to recognize our responsibility and begin to work toward it. And we should do so joyfully. The gospel is the good news. Commandments lead to blessings. The Prophet Joseph Smith told our first missionaries that when preaching we should “warn in compassion.” We “have no right … to scare mankind to repentance,” he said. We should preach the gospel as “glad tidings of great joy unto all people” (History of the Church, 1:280).

We should also remember that the principle that the Golden Rule governs our earning activities is difficult to apply in practice. We should not consider employees responsible for policies they regret but cannot control. A decision that is made by the owner of a market should not inflict feelings of guilt on a conscientious but powerless Christian who runs the checkout stand. Similarly, a part-owner does not have freedom to impose his standards on business policies if he has partners who do not share his moral concerns. An incorporated business may be controlled by stockholders who have no concern for the destructive human effects of a profitable product or policy. This may provide an explanation for the Marriott Corp decision to sell porn...i dunno..I would like to know if Mitt and the Marriots opposed this decision and if so how vigorously?

We live in a complex society, where even the simplest principle can be exquisitely difficult to apply. I admire investors who are determined not to obtain income or investment profits from transactions that add to the sum total of sin and misery in the world. But they will have difficulty finding investments that meet this high standard. Good things are often packaged with bad, so decisions usually involve balancing. In a world of corporate diversification, we are likely to find that a business dealing in beverages sells milk in one division and alcohol in another. Just when we think that our investments are entirely unspotted from the world, we may find that our life insurance is partially funded by investments we wish to avoid. Or our savings may be deposited in a bank that is lending to ventures we could not approve. Such complexities make it difficult to prescribe firm rules.

We must rely on teaching correct principles, which each member should personally apply to govern his or her own circumstances. To that end, each of us should give thoughtful and prayerful consideration to whether we are looking after the well-being of our neighbors in the way we earn our daily bread.

The motive of Cain is at the headwaters of wickedness. Cain’s sin was murder, but his motive was personal gain. That motive has produced all manner of wickedness, including murder, thievery, and fraud. That motive is also at work in the legal but immoral practices of those who get gain by preying on the weaknesses or ignorance of their neighbors. Always such activities involve Cain’s ancient rationalization: “Am I my brother’s keeper?”

In contrast, the Savior taught us to “love [our] enemies, bless them that curse [us], do good to them that hate [us], and pray for them who despitefully use [us] and persecute [us]” (3 Ne. 12:44). When we have that duty toward our enemies, we cannot allow ourselves to do less for our partners, our customers, our employees, and others with whom we deal in the marketplace.

What a beautiful and happy world this would be if all of us would strive to live these principles to the fullest. Our efforts and influence would affect millions. Examples improve society more than sermons. Most people would rather see a sermon than hear one.

In those brilliant generations that followed the appearance of the resurrected Christ in the New World, “there were no contentions and disputations among [the people], and every man did deal justly one with another” (4 Ne. 1:2). Fourth Nephi records: “Surely there could not be a happier people among all the people who had been created by the hand of God” (4 Ne. 1:16). We should be striving to regain that condition. As modern revelation declares: “Zion must increase in beauty, and in holiness” (D&C 82:14). One of the ways prescribed to achieve that increase is “every man seeking the interest of his neighbor, and doing all things with an eye single to the glory of God” (D&C 82:19).

May God bless us to live the Golden Rule in our earning activities. As we seek to be our brother’s keeper, we will be attempting to follow in the footsteps of the Master. I testify of Jesus Christ, our Savior, whose blood has atoned for repented sins and whose resurrection has broken the bands of death for all. The fulness of the gospel was restored through the Prophet Joseph Smith. His successor, President Ezra Taft Benson, holds the keys of the everlasting gospel in our day. In the name of Jesus Christ, amen.

Nan wrote:If it was my son watching porn I would be very unhappy with him and we would be working with him. I don't care so much of the souls of strangers as I do for my children. And someone isn't repentant if they offer excuses or try to say what someone else is doing is worse. Doesn't matter what other people are doing. We aren't judged on a curve. We are judged by what we know and what we do with it.

What if he never looked at the stuff, ever, but became a public relations officer for a large pornographic production firm? Would that be okay?

So your uncle is saying that I should be able to sell cocaine or heroine and it should be perfectly acceptable with my standing with the Lord? After all there is a market for it. I am just catering to those around me rather than standing for something?

While bro Nelson's video is applicable. Also applicable would be to read the end of Mormon Chp 8 to find out what Moroni has to say about we the Church in our day. We have a long way to go, and there should be no justifications for our failings. It is truly sad to read his description of what he has seen us become.

http://www.lds.org/scriptures/bofm/morm/8?lang=eng" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

sadie_Mormon wrote:While living in AZ I met many LDS - a few of which were millionaires. One I can say is a dear friend and investment partner of mine. Knowing how they conduct business I can say none of them can be honestly answering the "Are you honest in your dealings with your fellowmen?" question. I'm in no position to judge them of course, but I have first hand experience of a lifetime Temple worthy Priesthood holder conning me out of thousands of dollars. He was a lawyer go figure.

I remember going to meet a vendor with my investment partner and the person we met was a young attractive girl. He was flirting to the point of where I was very uncomfortable. Uncomfortable enough to say something to him later in the car. His wife told me of a time when she witnessed him flirting agressively with the young female staff at the gym. This friend is a very good looking man (as is him wife) and have been married for 25 years. Seeing him in action makes me wonder at times if he's ever acting on the urge to be intimate with another women. If so then how is he answering the question "Do you live the law of chastity?"

It's because I do not put myself in the position of judge and jury as to why I remain friends with those I might think are likely not living rightously.

I've seen the good, the bad, and the ugly. All you can do is focus on your life and how you choose to lead it. If we get consumed with how everyone else is living it we'll make ourselfs nuts and in the process hinder our own progress forward.

It sounds to me your partner was a psychopath. No really, about 3% of the male population and 1% of the female population is psychopathic. The percentage grows as you examine people who are at the top of the political and corporate world. And as psychopathy is strongly correlated with genetics it would be misguided to say that the percentage of LDS psychopaths is any less than the general population.

Traits of a psychopath: http://www.minddisorders.com/Flu-Inv/Ha ... klist.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; And remember, you don't have to fit all of these to be a psychopath. However, the main traits are superficial charm, lack of guilt, lack of empathy (empathy and sympathy are two different things), being an expert manipulator, having the ability to lie effectively and also skilled at rationalization.

Dumb ones wind up in jail, smart ones in power.

p51-mustang wrote:Marriott corp recently decided to stop selling porn starting in 2013. I find it interesting that they say that couldn't stop the porn from being shown but now they say they made the decision to stop it. If they can stop it in 2013 then why couldn't they stop it in 2005 or even chosen to never sell it in the first place?

if this be the case it is time for someone to stop dancing on their soap box and offer forgiveness. If only all sins smelled of cigarette smoke :ymhug:

This discussion is somewhat reminiscient of the same problem I believe Attorneys have – can an LDS member be an Attorney and still answer in the affirmative that they are honest in their dealings with their fellow men? Given today’s political and justice system climate/arena, I honestly (no pun intended) do not see how a member of the church can be an Attorney and not engage in dishonest practice? Why do people go into law? Money. Job security maybe. But most go into it for the money you can make, but can you make the money you want while being honest with your work? How many cases would you be limited to if you only took those where you knew you were defending or prosecuting someone who was guilty and/or innocent?
I look at these guys on TV like Siegfried and Jensen (local – Salt Lake area accident Attorneys) and wonder how they can sleep at night knowing they are engaging in abhorrent practices such as chasing down ambulances and encouraging a prospective Client to sue the pants off the person who injured them (intentional or not). Lives can be destroyed like that, but as long as they get their fair share at the end of the day, oh well. Sadly, this has become the case with LDS members involved in the selling and/or distribution of porn… ‘hey, it’s legal, and those who do it are making their own choice’, therefore, it’s OK’. If you’re a member of the church and can live with being dishonest in your dealings with your fellow men as long as you’re making a bunch of money or engaging in earning a living by peddling smut, more power to you – just remember what is going to happen though to those who have been entering the temple unworthily and the parable of the wheat and tares.

ask Marriot

Like I said, she has an interesting hypothesis: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTvaGzkOjl0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;