Your home for discussing politics, the restored gospel of Jesus Christ, and the principles of liberty.
https://ldsfreedomforum.com/
I'm referring to the president and what people joke about with the Washington Monument. It's dirty. I probably shouldn't have brought it up. :ymblushing:Muerte Rosa wrote:???what???Phoenixstar117 wrote:If only they had a replica of the Washington Monument.jbalm wrote:I always thought Clinton was the worst Utah city.
Or maybe it does.marktheshark wrote: Or maybe it doesn't.
You are the one that wanted to fabricate an argument for the sake of arguing. I will humor you.
In the context of having someone's yard having to meet a certain standard in a neighborhood, there's nothing inherently wicked about that at all, so having a city ordinance being put in place in this situation isn't "wicked" by context. (Unintentional Chiasm)
In the context of talking about gay marriage, it absolutely is inherently wicked.
They are two different topics and contexts completely unrelated to each other.
So, you saying I was inconsistent is completely unfounded because the context of the two comments were completely unrelated.
How many different ways do I have to structure the sentence?
Whatever.jbalm wrote:Or maybe it does.marktheshark wrote: Or maybe it doesn't.
You are the one that wanted to fabricate an argument for the sake of arguing. I will humor you.
In the context of having someone's yard having to meet a certain standard in a neighborhood, there's nothing inherently wicked about that at all, so having a city ordinance being put in place in this situation isn't "wicked" by context. (Unintentional Chiasm)
In the context of talking about gay marriage, it absolutely is inherently wicked.
They are two different topics and contexts completely unrelated to each other.
So, you saying I was inconsistent is completely unfounded because the context of the two comments were completely unrelated.
How many different ways do I have to structure the sentence?
Your counterargument has nothing to do with context. It has to do with your disagreement with light-one's premise.
I kind of figured that you didn't know what "context" means.
So long as they show an increase of love after they force and fine people :ymcowboy:marktheshark wrote:
In the context of having someone's yard having to meet a certain standard in a neighborhood, there's nothing inherently wicked about that at all, so having a city ordinance being put in place in this situation isn't "wicked" by context. (Unintentional Chiasm)
Thanks for the laugh!!!! :)) =)) :))shadow wrote:So long as they show an increase of love after they force and fine people :ymcowboy:marktheshark wrote:
In the context of having someone's yard having to meet a certain standard in a neighborhood, there's nothing inherently wicked about that at all, so having a city ordinance being put in place in this situation isn't "wicked" by context. (Unintentional Chiasm)
8-}marktheshark wrote:Whatever.jbalm wrote:Or maybe it does.marktheshark wrote: Or maybe it doesn't.
You are the one that wanted to fabricate an argument for the sake of arguing. I will humor you.
In the context of having someone's yard having to meet a certain standard in a neighborhood, there's nothing inherently wicked about that at all, so having a city ordinance being put in place in this situation isn't "wicked" by context. (Unintentional Chiasm)
In the context of talking about gay marriage, it absolutely is inherently wicked.
They are two different topics and contexts completely unrelated to each other.
So, you saying I was inconsistent is completely unfounded because the context of the two comments were completely unrelated.
How many different ways do I have to structure the sentence?
Your counterargument has nothing to do with context. It has to do with your disagreement with light-one's premise.
I kind of figured that you didn't know what "context" means.
Lol.shadow wrote:So long as they show an increase of love after they force and fine people :ymcowboy:marktheshark wrote:
In the context of having someone's yard having to meet a certain standard in a neighborhood, there's nothing inherently wicked about that at all, so having a city ordinance being put in place in this situation isn't "wicked" by context. (Unintentional Chiasm)
very very sadmarktheshark wrote:(stuff has been stolen from temple locker rooms so many times)
marktheshark wrote:Whatever.jbalm wrote:Or maybe it does.marktheshark wrote: Or maybe it doesn't.
You are the one that wanted to fabricate an argument for the sake bof arguing. I will humor you.
In the context of having someone's yard having to meet a certain standard in a neighborhood, there's nothing inherently wicked about that at all, so having a city ordinance being put in place in this situation isn't "wicked" by context. (Unintentional Chiasm)
In the context of talking about gay marriage, it absolutely is inherently wicked.
FSM to the rescue of jbalm.
My turn.
I haven't stolen anything out of the temple locker room all week. Plus I do not consider gay and lesbian people wicked at all. I admire them. But I'm a guy and on into girls.
jbalm is one of the kindest people on hear to me and others. Don't you worry jbalm I got your back.
They are two different topics and contexts completely unrelated to each other.
So, you saying I was inconsistent is completely unfounded because the context of the two comments were completely unrelated.
How many different ways do I have to structure the sentence?
Your counterargument has nothing to do with context. It has to do with your disagreement with light-one's premise.
I kind of figured that you didn't know what "context" means.
I just tried to reply to a post and really messed things up. So hear we go again.jbalm wrote:marktheshark wrote:I live here in SLC and I have to say that you may just be unknowing of a lot of the problems that exist and are rampant in LDS communities. Backbiters, gossipers, judgmental, dissenters, fornicators, liars, adulterers, crooks, thieves (stuff has been stolen from temple locker rooms so many times), prominent pornography usage, drug use and abuse, speaking evils and criticisms against the Lord's anointed servants, and the list goes on.
I'm not a sinless person myself and pray for forgiveness often for my weaknesses, I'm just pointing out that these are existing problems that are not "few and far between" among those calling themselves latter-day saints. It's certainly not a majority issue, but there's quite a bit of it.
Let's call a spade a spade. "Wo unto those that say all is well in Zion"
Then let's point out that gay marriage is legal, there is a larger per capita self-identifying lgbt population here in SLC than any other city in the entire country.
The amount of liberal and damming socialist viewpoints and constructs creeping into the communities here is a poison. President Benson was extremely vocal against this stuff.
There are also many extremely kind, charitable, loving, humble people who you can tell are doing things right the best they can.
The extravagance and financial bondage comment is absolutely spot on, by the way. 100% true.Not too concerned about consistency, are we?marktheshark wrote:
City ordinance has nothing to do with "wickedness" or pride.
Read up on the city of New Jerusalem, and how specific the Lord will be in instructing us how to build the city.
LittleLion wrote: ... The LDS businessmen were so corrupt they made the businessmen in Chicago, New York, Detroit, San Fransisco, Portland, and many others cities I worked in, look like kids fighting over candy in the park, its was horrendous. These were people that were Bishops, Stake Presidents and higher...
There was a law called the "on demand" law and it was to protect the cab licenses that the city issued so cab drivers could make an honest living. It stated that if anyone needed public transportation on demand, meaning within a two hour window of when you needed the ride, then you had to call a cab and could not use private transportation companies. This also protected the city as they received income from the licenses. Private transportation companies did not provide that kind of money to the city. So if you preplanned private transportation outside of the two hour window you could use it without breaking the law. This was well before UTA or many private companies were around. It was very good business to be in and you could raise a family, buy a house and have a good life driving cab. A cab license in New York called a medallion is a precious commodity and sells for over 250 thousand dollars, seriously. The licenses in Salt Lake went for around 1000 dollars but have been sold by owners for as high as 20 thousand because they only issue so many. They are very limited.Jezebel wrote:Corruption in the cab industry? I can understand satanic practices in prostitution, but I can't think of a single way driving a cab around could be corrupt, other than overcharging customers or something like that.
Regina I wish so much I was wrong. I wish Salt Lake was a place that was different than other cities. But the fact is it is different because it is more corrupt that most. I would not lie about such a thing. It is my birth place. Do you think I want it to be this way? No.Regina wrote:I think you are lying.
Nope, not at all. If anything I am erring on the conservative side. I wish it were not true.Muerte Rosa wrote:Exaggerating
Correct, as I explained to Jezebel. But the cab companies themselves were just as bad as the city officials. Thanks for the links.light-one wrote:The taxi corruption is more in city hall than among the drivers.
I don't know marketyshark, apparently God kicked out of Heaven Lucifer and his followers after their desire to force and coerce people. They were "thrust down". Sounds like God didn't think too highly of their ways. They wanted earth to be a big HOA.marktheshark wrote:Lol.shadow wrote:So long as they show an increase of love after they force and fine people :ymcowboy:marktheshark wrote:
In the context of having someone's yard having to meet a certain standard in a neighborhood, there's nothing inherently wicked about that at all, so having a city ordinance being put in place in this situation isn't "wicked" by context. (Unintentional Chiasm)
But for real, bad situation for the one guy. Life isn't always fair. We all get that. I don't think the Lord is sending anyone to hell for it though.
=))shadow wrote:I don't know marketyshark, apparently God kicked out of Heaven Lucifer and his followers after their desire to force and coerce people. They were "thrust down". Sounds like God didn't think too highly of their ways. They wanted earth to be a big HOA.
The bad part about statistics is they are only the tip of the iceberg because the reporting agencies will never report on the really horrific stuff that would shake up the whole control paradigm. But they give you little tidbits to make you think they are on top of it by reporting anything at all. While the really bad stuff continues unabated.light-one wrote:Actual statistics:
What a mess!LittleLion wrote:There was a law called the "on demand" law and it was to protect the cab licenses that the city issued so cab drivers could make an honest living. It stated that if anyone needed public transportation on demand, meaning within a two hour window of when you needed the ride, then you had to call a cab and could not use private transportation companies. This also protected the city as they received income from the licenses. Private transportation companies did not provide that kind of money to the city. So if you preplanned private transportation outside of the two hour window you could use it without breaking the law. This was well before UTA or many private companies were around. It was very good business to be in and you could raise a family, buy a house and have a good life driving cab. A cab license in New York called a medallion is a precious commodity and sells for over 250 thousand dollars, seriously. The licenses in Salt Lake went for around 1000 dollars but have been sold by owners for as high as 20 thousand because they only issue so many. They are very limited.Jezebel wrote:Corruption in the cab industry? I can understand satanic practices in prostitution, but I can't think of a single way driving a cab around could be corrupt, other than overcharging customers or something like that.
So when the big Hotels came into being and Salt Lake started becoming cosmopolitan, big money started rolling in. The big money was staying in the big downtown hotels and wanted private transportation. So they would pay the Doormen at the hotels to get them the transportation thereby circumventing the laws. There were other factors involved also. So cabbies started losing money and could not make a living. The cab companies (unbelievably) and the private companies payed off the city officials to look the other way. Cabbies started selling their licenses to other cab owner operators because they could not make a living any more. Mostly the licenses migrated to the owners of the cab companies because they had the money. So the people that owned the licenses then "rented" the cabs to mostly immigrants who had to stay in their cabs 16-18 hours a day just to make a living. I could go on and on about this subject but you get the idea.