LDS Freedom Forum

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:30 pm 2 CEOs are soo great!
https://fortune.com/2014/09/20/oracle-t ... -disaster/

Ah but companies with one CEO never have issues lololol

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:31 pm

Stahura wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:30 pm

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:25 pm

Stahura wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:24 pm

I don’t think you are detrimental to the church. The black and white thinking you have expressed in this thread on this topic is.

Nice back-pedal.

I didn’t back pedal, you put words in my mouth. At this point, given your behavior it’s not worth interacting with you anymore.

Have fun with your petty arguments with others

Says the guy who believes that a woman submitting means "to be commanded like a child"
Even though that same guy works for a living and submits to other's authority on a daily basis.

Stahura wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:32 pm

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:31 pm

Stahura wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:30 pm

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:25 pm
Nice back-pedal.

I didn’t back pedal, you put words in my mouth. At this point, given your behavior it’s not worth interacting with you anymore.

Have fun with your petty arguments with others

Says the guy who believes that a woman submitting means "to be commanded like a child"
Even though that same guy works for a living and submits to other's authority on a daily basis.

Couldn't handle the heat. Bye!

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:30 pm 2 CEOs are soo great!
https://fortune.com/2014/09/20/oracle-t ... -disaster/

Three is even better! (Finding a wbesite that’s negative about something is easy, just as easy as finding something postive. People have opinions and this doesn’t work for you)

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thever ... 7-earnings

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:23 pm

Valo wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:21 pm

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:16 pm

Valo wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:14 pm

catcatinabox:

Only on the internet do you get to say such silly things and get a way with it.

You have no proof. Providing questions are not proof and its not pudding. Why do I need to investigate claims that you are making? Why don't you provide me with the proof since you have already investigated this?

You can try to pretend that its my fault that you can't prove your ideas, but, its just make believe.

Conclusion: catcatinabox lied when he said the proof was in the pudding. There was no proof, no pudding, nothing. He is gaslightning now because he can't prove his words yet he wants people to believe him.

Got it. Although I had already figured you out. I was just giving you the benefit of the doubt.

In case you didn't pick up on this, you've lost credibility with me. That means outside of pointing out your logical errors and nonsensical statements (if I feel so inclined) I will not be expecting anything from you and so therefore I will not be using any more of my time attempting to engage with you in a discussion. That is until you prove yourself credible again.

Valo

ROFLOL. You won't even research the questions. And then you claim I'm lying and gaslighting . . .ROFLOL

Like I said, providing you the data wouldn't help-you would reject it.

Uh, huh. Yep, you sure did prove that providing me with data would result in me rejecting it because you provided me with so much data to prove your points.

Here are all the data you provided that I rejected:

Since equality has been preached (~1950s) are marriage rates higher or lower?
Since that time are divorces rates higher or lower?
Since that time are women happier or less happy?
Since that time are children more happy or less happy?
Since that time are more children being raised in stable homes or not?
Are their more children in day-care today vs. then?

These questions totally proved your point. Man, your case is rock solid! And to think I rejected all this data, all this proof, I just tossed out the window.

Valo

Lol, I've repeatedly told you to go find the answers to those questions. You won't do it. Boy, you sure showed me!

That's true, you have repeatedly said that. You've repeatedly asked me to research answers to questions that you posed as "proof" that your position is correct.

Meanwhile, here in the land of reason, I've repeatedly asked you to provide the data to back up the claims that YOU MADE. You won't do it.

Valo

ori wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:26 pm

Alaris wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 11:21 am I think the sifting could be as simple as the empowerment of women as theses curses are lifted - we're not talking 60s liberation where boots are made for walking - we're talking women are empowered to become priestesses to hold their own authority that speaks to their eternal roles where the man still presides over her works. Can you imagine a simpler way to weed out the proud on both extremes? Women have a restored priesthood - but yeah they're still made by, made for, and given to their husbands in sealing. How many folks would melt over that?

Add the restoration of polygamy and how many would be left after that? A tenth maybe?

I feel comfort in the knowledge that safety lies with following the prophet. (Props to Stahura for his "follow the prophet" avatar). I'm ready for whatever changes the prophet, or the quorum of the 12, announces. Restoration of polygamy seems so far out there. I would be very, very surprised if that was restored again any time soon. But if it were restored, I would accept it. If they let the young women help out with the passing of the sacrament, as justme wishes, I would gladly accept the change. I'm ready for the ride. I am personally tiring of all the changes, but at the same time, I'm also looking forward to the coming of the Son of Man, so whatever it takes to get there, I'm all in.

Thanks for your thoughts, Alaris.

Don’t worry about polygamy the church leaders have said it has served it purpose and they do not anticipate its return.
The second coming is what we need to be preparing for. Change is hard for most people but we were told to prepare and rest up to endure it.

Valo wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 1:42 pm

Sirius wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 1:28 pm

Valo wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 1:04 pm

Sirius wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 10:14 am Our conditioning of Babylon is very prevalent. When did submitting become some horrible and derogatory thing? Christ, the greatest of us, showed the true power of submission in many aspects of his life. And taught the importance of the same. The acceptance of "equality" as the world defines and teaches, is toxic. It's nothing more than the doctrine of Satan. To be the same, to have the same all across the board, no matter what, regardless of choice or action. You are entitled to everything for just being. It removes accountability from the individual, thus rendering them an agent to be acted upon, rather then to act. It removes the need for an atonement, the need to repent or change. God has placed all creation in it's proper sphere and order, and commanded within that order and sphere. Satan's doctrine of equality and rights is alive and well within the church in all forms, and unfortunately is being celebrated as righteousness and progression.

Let's talk about "spheres and order". So, wasn't it God who placed the African Americans in to their proper place and sphere: Servants to white people. Am I right, or am I right? (Attention: I don't believe this for a second. I'm using this to make a point and to show how ridiculous your ARGUMENT is).



Valo

Do you reject the fact that choices you make here affect your position in the next life? Would you reject your choices before this life had effect on your current situation in this life? Do you believe there to be advantages and disadvantages in our former life, here, and in the eternities? How do these advantages and disadvantages come about, and God still remain just?

18 Whatever principle of intelligence we attain unto in this life, it will rise with us in the resurrection.

19 And if a person gains more knowledge and intelligence in this life through his diligence and obedience than another, he will have so much the advantage in the world to come.

20 There is a law, irrevocably decreed in heaven before the foundations of this world, upon which all blessings are predicated—

21 And when we obtain any blessing from God, it is by obedience to that law upon which it is predicated.

Is this scripture just showing how ridiculous my "ARGUMENT" is? Would it be unreasonable to understand from this, and other scriptures that our choices have EVERYTHING to do with our advantages, disadvantages, roles, blessings, opportunities, strengths, weaknesses, and on and on.. whether in this life, our past life, or in the eternities? You can choose to not believe this for all the seconds. Doesn't change the truth.

I apologize for triggering you with my comments on submission. But I will not change my understanding of it being a great virtue.

Stop gaslighting and deal with the content of my post. You haven't done anything to address the ridiculous nature of your position.

Nobody is triggered except for apparently you guys who don't like women being esteemed the same as men.

The reality is that women get to stand as witnesses. That's it. All this other jazz about eternity, eternal consequences, the sky is falling kind of stuff, is nonsense. And if it's not nonsense, you and your team haven't done anything to alleviate that perception.

Valo

Gaslighting? I've addressed my position. You wanted to talk about a specific,

Let's talk about "spheres and order". So, wasn't it God who placed the African Americans in to their proper place and sphere: Servants to white people. Am I right, or am I right? (Attention: I don't believe this for a second. I'm using this to make a point and to show how ridiculous your ARGUMENT is).

I addressed this, and your response is simply,

You haven't done anything to address the ridiculous nature of your position

.

I don't want to be esteemed as a woman, and if I was a woman I surely wouldn't want to be esteemed as a man. Why does that need attacking? Men and women are not the same for good reason. Why is it that everything in today's society requires it to be the same in order to have value? To be clear, I'm not of the opinion that women are lesser than, and I don't believe others in this thread feel that either. Men and Women are different and have different roles, we were created this way, we chose this way. This is a good thing, not bad. I can appreciate the qualities I am missing as a man, because I recognize those in a woman, and vice versa. Together we become a whole, still not the same. You can disagree with, hate, or all together turn away from God's established order of things. But until one submits to His established order, they can never truly be happy.

Valo wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:33 pm

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:23 pm

Valo wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:21 pm

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:16 pm
ROFLOL. You won't even research the questions. And then you claim I'm lying and gaslighting . . .ROFLOL

Like I said, providing you the data wouldn't help-you would reject it.

Uh, huh. Yep, you sure did prove that providing me with data would result in me rejecting it because you provided me with so much data to prove your points.

Here are all the data you provided that I rejected:

Since equality has been preached (~1950s) are marriage rates higher or lower?
Since that time are divorces rates higher or lower?
Since that time are women happier or less happy?
Since that time are children more happy or less happy?
Since that time are more children being raised in stable homes or not?
Are their more children in day-care today vs. then?

These questions totally proved your point. Man, your case is rock solid! And to think I rejected all this data, all this proof, I just tossed out the window.

Valo

Lol, I've repeatedly told you to go find the answers to those questions. You won't do it. Boy, you sure showed me!

That's true, you have repeatedly said that. You've repeatedly asked me to research answers to questions that you posed as "proof" that your position is correct.

Meanwhile, here in the land of reason, I've repeatedly asked you to provide the data to back up the claims that YOU MADE. You won't do it.

Valo

Yes in the land of reason, we aren't children where everything is given to you on a silver platter, you have to work for it!

MMbelieve wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:36 pm

ori wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:26 pm

Alaris wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 11:21 am I think the sifting could be as simple as the empowerment of women as theses curses are lifted - we're not talking 60s liberation where boots are made for walking - we're talking women are empowered to become priestesses to hold their own authority that speaks to their eternal roles where the man still presides over her works. Can you imagine a simpler way to weed out the proud on both extremes? Women have a restored priesthood - but yeah they're still made by, made for, and given to their husbands in sealing. How many folks would melt over that?

Add the restoration of polygamy and how many would be left after that? A tenth maybe?

I feel comfort in the knowledge that safety lies with following the prophet. (Props to Stahura for his "follow the prophet" avatar). I'm ready for whatever changes the prophet, or the quorum of the 12, announces. Restoration of polygamy seems so far out there. I would be very, very surprised if that was restored again any time soon. But if it were restored, I would accept it. If they let the young women help out with the passing of the sacrament, as justme wishes, I would gladly accept the change. I'm ready for the ride. I am personally tiring of all the changes, but at the same time, I'm also looking forward to the coming of the Son of Man, so whatever it takes to get there, I'm all in.

Thanks for your thoughts, Alaris.

Don’t worry about polygamy the church leaders have said it has served it purpose and they do not anticipate its return.
The second coming is what we need to be preparing for. Change is hard for most people but we were told to prepare and rest up to endure it.

Polygamy and church leaders comments on it are a whole other can of worms.

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:37 pm

Valo wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:33 pm

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:23 pm

Valo wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:21 pm

Uh, huh. Yep, you sure did prove that providing me with data would result in me rejecting it because you provided me with so much data to prove your points.

Here are all the data you provided that I rejected:

Since equality has been preached (~1950s) are marriage rates higher or lower?
Since that time are divorces rates higher or lower?
Since that time are women happier or less happy?
Since that time are children more happy or less happy?
Since that time are more children being raised in stable homes or not?
Are their more children in day-care today vs. then?

These questions totally proved your point. Man, your case is rock solid! And to think I rejected all this data, all this proof, I just tossed out the window.

Valo

Lol, I've repeatedly told you to go find the answers to those questions. You won't do it. Boy, you sure showed me!

That's true, you have repeatedly said that. You've repeatedly asked me to research answers to questions that you posed as "proof" that your position is correct.

Meanwhile, here in the land of reason, I've repeatedly asked you to provide the data to back up the claims that YOU MADE. You won't do it.

Valo

Yes in the land of reason, we aren't children where everything is given to you on a silver platter, you have to work for it!

In he land of reason, like Jesus Christ Himself, you give scripture to back up your assertions. The Son of God Himself echoed and cited scripture to show His truth. Even after His resurrection He answered questions through scripture, the road to Emaus?

Sirius wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:36 pm

Valo wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 1:42 pm

Sirius wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 1:28 pm

Valo wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 1:04 pm



Let's talk about "spheres and order". So, wasn't it God who placed the African Americans in to their proper place and sphere: Servants to white people. Am I right, or am I right? (Attention: I don't believe this for a second. I'm using this to make a point and to show how ridiculous your ARGUMENT is).



Valo

Do you reject the fact that choices you make here affect your position in the next life? Would you reject your choices before this life had effect on your current situation in this life? Do you believe there to be advantages and disadvantages in our former life, here, and in the eternities? How do these advantages and disadvantages come about, and God still remain just?

18 Whatever principle of intelligence we attain unto in this life, it will rise with us in the resurrection.

19 And if a person gains more knowledge and intelligence in this life through his diligence and obedience than another, he will have so much the advantage in the world to come.

20 There is a law, irrevocably decreed in heaven before the foundations of this world, upon which all blessings are predicated—

21 And when we obtain any blessing from God, it is by obedience to that law upon which it is predicated.

Is this scripture just showing how ridiculous my "ARGUMENT" is? Would it be unreasonable to understand from this, and other scriptures that our choices have EVERYTHING to do with our advantages, disadvantages, roles, blessings, opportunities, strengths, weaknesses, and on and on.. whether in this life, our past life, or in the eternities? You can choose to not believe this for all the seconds. Doesn't change the truth.

I apologize for triggering you with my comments on submission. But I will not change my understanding of it being a great virtue.

Stop gaslighting and deal with the content of my post. You haven't done anything to address the ridiculous nature of your position.

Nobody is triggered except for apparently you guys who don't like women being esteemed the same as men.

The reality is that women get to stand as witnesses. That's it. All this other jazz about eternity, eternal consequences, the sky is falling kind of stuff, is nonsense. And if it's not nonsense, you and your team haven't done anything to alleviate that perception.

Valo

Gaslighting? I've addressed my position. You wanted to talk about a specific,

Let's talk about "spheres and order". So, wasn't it God who placed the African Americans in to their proper place and sphere: Servants to white people. Am I right, or am I right? (Attention: I don't believe this for a second. I'm using this to make a point and to show how ridiculous your ARGUMENT is).

I addressed this, and your response is simply,

You haven't done anything to address the ridiculous nature of your position

.

I don't want to be esteemed as a woman, and if I was a woman I surely wouldn't want to be esteemed as a man. Why does that need attacking? Men and women are not the same for good reason. Why is it that everything in today's society requires it to be the same in order to have value? To be clear, I'm not of the opinion that women are lesser than, and I don't believe others in this thread feel that either. Men and Women are different and have different roles, we were created this way, we chose this way. This is a good thing, not bad. I can appreciate the qualities I am missing as a man, because I recognize those in a woman, and vice versa. Together we become a whole, still not the same. You can disagree with, hate, or all together turn away from God's established order of things. But until one submits to His established order, they can never truly be happy.

You ignored pretty much my whole post. I pointed out several areas in your thinking and reasoning that are problematic and in response you ignored them all except for one part and in response you ask a bunch of irrelevant questions as if they were relevant to the topic or specifically to my counter claims in my post to you.

Take a gander at my post again and try addressing my counter claims in totality.

Valo

MMbelieve wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:36 pm Don’t worry about polygamy the church leaders have said it has served it purpose and they do not anticipate its return.
The second coming is what we need to be preparing for. Change is hard for most people but we were told to prepare and rest up to endure it.

I'm not worried about polygamy, and I do not anticipate its return. I'm not worried about any upcoming changes. I'm actually excited for them. But at the same time, I'm tired of so much change, it can be exhausting. The biggest change coming up for me is the new youth program. It affects me a lot since I have children in the youth program, and I'm one of the leaders of the youth in the ward.

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:37 pm

Valo wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:33 pm

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:23 pm

Valo wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:21 pm

Uh, huh. Yep, you sure did prove that providing me with data would result in me rejecting it because you provided me with so much data to prove your points.

Here are all the data you provided that I rejected:

Since equality has been preached (~1950s) are marriage rates higher or lower?
Since that time are divorces rates higher or lower?
Since that time are women happier or less happy?
Since that time are children more happy or less happy?
Since that time are more children being raised in stable homes or not?
Are their more children in day-care today vs. then?

These questions totally proved your point. Man, your case is rock solid! And to think I rejected all this data, all this proof, I just tossed out the window.

Valo

Lol, I've repeatedly told you to go find the answers to those questions. You won't do it. Boy, you sure showed me!

That's true, you have repeatedly said that. You've repeatedly asked me to research answers to questions that you posed as "proof" that your position is correct.

Meanwhile, here in the land of reason, I've repeatedly asked you to provide the data to back up the claims that YOU MADE. You won't do it.

Valo

Yes in the land of reason, we aren't children where everything is given to you on a silver platter, you have to work for it!

Right, since that is what is going on here. I'm asking you to give me everything on a silver platter. Exactly!

Of course its my fault that you can't prove your words!

You posed a bunch of questions, suggesting that since "equality doctrine" and because of "equality doctrine":

1. Marriage rates are lower
2. Divorce rates are higher
3. Women are not as happy
4. Children are not as happy
5. Increase in unstable homes
6. Increase in children in day-care

These are some of the reasons you suggested as to why we should reject "equality doctrine".

I don't think you have a leg to stand on but it's no my job to prove your words or to do your research for you. I don't believe that you can show a casaul link between equality doctrine as it is currently taught in the Church and those social and family issues that you have identified. I think the fact that you have yet to provide the data just means you were pulling things out of your butt because you believe the fact that you have a penis makes it true that those with a vagina should submit to you.

Valo

Valo wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:47 pm

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:37 pm

Valo wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:33 pm

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:23 pm
Lol, I've repeatedly told you to go find the answers to those questions. You won't do it. Boy, you sure showed me!

That's true, you have repeatedly said that. You've repeatedly asked me to research answers to questions that you posed as "proof" that your position is correct.

Meanwhile, here in the land of reason, I've repeatedly asked you to provide the data to back up the claims that YOU MADE. You won't do it.

Valo

Yes in the land of reason, we aren't children where everything is given to you on a silver platter, you have to work for it!

Right, since that is what is going on here. I'm asking you to give me everything on a silver platter. Exactly!

Of course its my fault that you can't prove your words!

You posed a bunch of questions, suggesting that since "equality doctrine" and because of "equality doctrine":

1. Marriage rates are lower
2. Divorce rates are higher
3. Women are not as happy
4. Children are not as happy
5. Increase in unstable homes
6. Increase in children in day-care

These are some of the reasons you suggested as to why we should reject "equality doctrine".

I don't think you have a leg to stand on but it's no my job to prove your words or to do your research for you. I don't believe that you can show a casaul link between equality doctrine as it is currently taught in the Church and those social and family issues that you have identified. I think the fact that you have yet to provide the data just means you were pulling things out of your butt because you believe the fact that you have a penis makes it true that those with a vagina should submit to you.

Valo

Exactly. These assertions have been made with Zero evidence to connect them. Ice cream sales spike during the summer and more people die of drowning in the summer, does that mean Ice cream is drowning people? No. Obviously not.

There is no way to “prove” without amazing research papers and experiments that this “equality doctrine” is the root of these problems.

Valo wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:47 pm

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:37 pm

Valo wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:33 pm

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:23 pm
Lol, I've repeatedly told you to go find the answers to those questions. You won't do it. Boy, you sure showed me!

That's true, you have repeatedly said that. You've repeatedly asked me to research answers to questions that you posed as "proof" that your position is correct.

Meanwhile, here in the land of reason, I've repeatedly asked you to provide the data to back up the claims that YOU MADE. You won't do it.

Valo

Yes in the land of reason, we aren't children where everything is given to you on a silver platter, you have to work for it!

Right, since that is what is going on here. I'm asking you to give me everything on a silver platter. Exactly!

Of course its my fault that you can't prove your words!

You posed a bunch of questions, suggesting that since "equality doctrine" and because of "equality doctrine":

1. Marriage rates are lower
2. Divorce rates are higher
3. Women are not as happy
4. Children are not as happy
5. Increase in unstable homes
6. Increase in children in day-care

These are some of the reasons you suggested as to why we should reject "equality doctrine".

I don't think you have a leg to stand on but it's no my job to prove your words or to do your research for you. I don't believe that you can show a casaul link between equality doctrine as it is currently taught in the Church and those social and family issues that you have identified. I think the fact that you have yet to provide the data just means you were pulling things out of your butt because you believe the fact that you have a penis makes it true that those with a vagina should submit to you.

Valo

See you already knew the answers, but you wanted to make me out to be the bad guy.

I told you the data I provided won't convince you because you believe it was something different. That's fine-you are free to believe that. You just don't get to try and lay a trap and have me jump in it. I already knew you would reject what I would say and the data.

Such vulgarity from a supposed "disciple" of Christ . .. lol okay whatever.

SettingDogStar wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:50 pm

Valo wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:47 pm

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:37 pm

Valo wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:33 pm

That's true, you have repeatedly said that. You've repeatedly asked me to research answers to questions that you posed as "proof" that your position is correct.

Meanwhile, here in the land of reason, I've repeatedly asked you to provide the data to back up the claims that YOU MADE. You won't do it.

Valo

Yes in the land of reason, we aren't children where everything is given to you on a silver platter, you have to work for it!

Right, since that is what is going on here. I'm asking you to give me everything on a silver platter. Exactly!

Of course its my fault that you can't prove your words!

You posed a bunch of questions, suggesting that since "equality doctrine" and because of "equality doctrine":

1. Marriage rates are lower
2. Divorce rates are higher
3. Women are not as happy
4. Children are not as happy
5. Increase in unstable homes
6. Increase in children in day-care

These are some of the reasons you suggested as to why we should reject "equality doctrine".

I don't think you have a leg to stand on but it's no my job to prove your words or to do your research for you. I don't believe that you can show a casaul link between equality doctrine as it is currently taught in the Church and those social and family issues that you have identified. I think the fact that you have yet to provide the data just means you were pulling things out of your butt because you believe the fact that you have a penis makes it true that those with a vagina should submit to you.

Valo

Exactly. These assertions have been made with Zero evidence to connect them. Ice cream sales spike during the summer and more people die of drowning in the summer, does that mean Ice cream is drowning people? No. Obviously not.

There is no way to “prove” without amazing research papers and experiments that this “equality doctrine” is the root of these problems.

It's what those who don't have eyes to see do.

Something has changed between 1950s and today. But I guess it was just "technology" that made the world more wicked.

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:52 pm

SettingDogStar wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:50 pm

Valo wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:47 pm

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:37 pm
Yes in the land of reason, we aren't children where everything is given to you on a silver platter, you have to work for it!

Right, since that is what is going on here. I'm asking you to give me everything on a silver platter. Exactly!

Of course its my fault that you can't prove your words!

You posed a bunch of questions, suggesting that since "equality doctrine" and because of "equality doctrine":

1. Marriage rates are lower
2. Divorce rates are higher
3. Women are not as happy
4. Children are not as happy
5. Increase in unstable homes
6. Increase in children in day-care

These are some of the reasons you suggested as to why we should reject "equality doctrine".

I don't think you have a leg to stand on but it's no my job to prove your words or to do your research for you. I don't believe that you can show a casaul link between equality doctrine as it is currently taught in the Church and those social and family issues that you have identified. I think the fact that you have yet to provide the data just means you were pulling things out of your butt because you believe the fact that you have a penis makes it true that those with a vagina should submit to you.

Valo

Exactly. These assertions have been made with Zero evidence to connect them. Ice cream sales spike during the summer and more people die of drowning in the summer, does that mean Ice cream is drowning people? No. Obviously not.

There is no way to “prove” without amazing research papers and experiments that this “equality doctrine” is the root of these problems.

It's what those who don't have eyes to see do.

Something has changed between 1950s and today. But I guess it was just "technology" that made the world more wicked.

But again you’ve presented no evidence! You just assume that this is the connecting doctrine without saying why this must be. It could be literally any number of things or thousands of things together. Literally thousands of things have changed since the 1950s!

SettingDogStar wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:54 pm

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:52 pm

SettingDogStar wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:50 pm

Valo wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:47 pm

Right, since that is what is going on here. I'm asking you to give me everything on a silver platter. Exactly!

Of course its my fault that you can't prove your words!

You posed a bunch of questions, suggesting that since "equality doctrine" and because of "equality doctrine":

1. Marriage rates are lower
2. Divorce rates are higher
3. Women are not as happy
4. Children are not as happy
5. Increase in unstable homes
6. Increase in children in day-care

These are some of the reasons you suggested as to why we should reject "equality doctrine".

I don't think you have a leg to stand on but it's no my job to prove your words or to do your research for you. I don't believe that you can show a casaul link between equality doctrine as it is currently taught in the Church and those social and family issues that you have identified. I think the fact that you have yet to provide the data just means you were pulling things out of your butt because you believe the fact that you have a penis makes it true that those with a vagina should submit to you.

Valo

Exactly. These assertions have been made with Zero evidence to connect them. Ice cream sales spike during the summer and more people die of drowning in the summer, does that mean Ice cream is drowning people? No. Obviously not.

There is no way to “prove” without amazing research papers and experiments that this “equality doctrine” is the root of these problems.

It's what those who don't have eyes to see do.

Something has changed between 1950s and today. But I guess it was just "technology" that made the world more wicked.

But again you’ve presented no evidence! You just assume that this is the connecting doctrine without saying why this must be. It could be literally any number of things or thousands of things together.

Okay, fine put forth some ideas then!

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:50 pm

Valo wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:47 pm

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:37 pm

Valo wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:33 pm

That's true, you have repeatedly said that. You've repeatedly asked me to research answers to questions that you posed as "proof" that your position is correct.

Meanwhile, here in the land of reason, I've repeatedly asked you to provide the data to back up the claims that YOU MADE. You won't do it.

Valo

Yes in the land of reason, we aren't children where everything is given to you on a silver platter, you have to work for it!

Right, since that is what is going on here. I'm asking you to give me everything on a silver platter. Exactly!

Of course its my fault that you can't prove your words!

You posed a bunch of questions, suggesting that since "equality doctrine" and because of "equality doctrine":

1. Marriage rates are lower
2. Divorce rates are higher
3. Women are not as happy
4. Children are not as happy
5. Increase in unstable homes
6. Increase in children in day-care

These are some of the reasons you suggested as to why we should reject "equality doctrine".

I don't think you have a leg to stand on but it's no my job to prove your words or to do your research for you. I don't believe that you can show a casaul link between equality doctrine as it is currently taught in the Church and those social and family issues that you have identified. I think the fact that you have yet to provide the data just means you were pulling things out of your butt because you believe the fact that you have a penis makes it true that those with a vagina should submit to you.

Valo

See you already knew the answers, but you wanted to make me out to be the bad guy.

I told you the data I provided won't convince you because you believe it was something different. That's fine-you are free to believe that. You just don't get to try and lay a trap and have me jump in it. I already knew you would reject what I would say and the data.

Such vulgarity from a supposed "disciple" of Christ . .. lol okay whatever.

Vulgarity? Using scientific names for things isn’t vulgar. On top of that you literally just called someone a self-righteous “jerk”..that’s just as bad considering the origin of that word.

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:56 pm

SettingDogStar wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:54 pm

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:52 pm

SettingDogStar wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:50 pm

Exactly. These assertions have been made with Zero evidence to connect them. Ice cream sales spike during the summer and more people die of drowning in the summer, does that mean Ice cream is drowning people? No. Obviously not.

There is no way to “prove” without amazing research papers and experiments that this “equality doctrine” is the root of these problems.

It's what those who don't have eyes to see do.

Something has changed between 1950s and today. But I guess it was just "technology" that made the world more wicked.

But again you’ve presented no evidence! You just assume that this is the connecting doctrine without saying why this must be. It could be literally any number of things or thousands of things together.

Okay, fine put forth some ideas then!

—Technology and the internet have caused pornography to escalate which destroys families, evidenced by the fact that there are therapists solely for the reason for teach couples to overcome this addiction.

—Drugs have become even more accessible (and legal in some cases) and have also been the cause of divorce rates to increase and families broken. As evidenced by a dear family friend and family members.

—Abortion’s cause maritial issues (I can provide evidence) and with the tech to do it quicker and safer now they are far more prominent.

Could be these all working together, could be one in particular.

See? You asked me to provide some ideas and I did!

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:50 pm

Valo wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:47 pm

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:37 pm

Valo wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:33 pm

That's true, you have repeatedly said that. You've repeatedly asked me to research answers to questions that you posed as "proof" that your position is correct.

Meanwhile, here in the land of reason, I've repeatedly asked you to provide the data to back up the claims that YOU MADE. You won't do it.

Valo

Yes in the land of reason, we aren't children where everything is given to you on a silver platter, you have to work for it!

Right, since that is what is going on here. I'm asking you to give me everything on a silver platter. Exactly!

Of course its my fault that you can't prove your words!

You posed a bunch of questions, suggesting that since "equality doctrine" and because of "equality doctrine":

1. Marriage rates are lower
2. Divorce rates are higher
3. Women are not as happy
4. Children are not as happy
5. Increase in unstable homes
6. Increase in children in day-care

These are some of the reasons you suggested as to why we should reject "equality doctrine".

I don't think you have a leg to stand on but it's no my job to prove your words or to do your research for you. I don't believe that you can show a casaul link between equality doctrine as it is currently taught in the Church and those social and family issues that you have identified. I think the fact that you have yet to provide the data just means you were pulling things out of your butt because you believe the fact that you have a penis makes it true that those with a vagina should submit to you.

Valo

See you already knew the answers, but you wanted to make me out to be the bad guy.

What are you talking about? I wasn't asserting anything or validating your claims. I was convieniently listing the claims that you made in your post. I've asked you to provide data to back up those claims. You still haven't provided the data.

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:50 pmI told you the data I provided won't convince you because you believe it was something different. That's fine-you are free to believe that. You just don't get to try and lay a trap and have me jump in it. I already knew you would reject what I would say and the data.

What data did you provide? I didn't provide any data. You do realize that you making a claim is not data, right? That list that I just convieniently typed out are YOUR "assertions" they are things that you are claiming as being true. That list, is a list of things I'm asking you to provide proof or data on. You have not shown that those claims are true. You have provided no data validate your claims.

If you did, then...

Where did you provide the data showing a causal link between "equality doctrine" as its taught in the Church and an increase in divorce rates?

Where did you provide the data showing a causal link between "equality doctrine" as its taught in the Church and a decrease in marriage rates?

Where did you provide the data showing a causal link between "equality doctrine" as its taught in the Church and the increase unhappiness of women?

Where did you provide the data showing a causal link between "equality doctrine" as its taught in the Church and the increase unhappiness of children?

Where did you provide the data showing a causal link between "equality doctrine" as its taught in the Church and the increase in unstable homes?

Where did you provide the data showing a causal link between "equality doctrine" as its taught in the Church and an increase in children in day-care?

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:50 pmSuch vulgarity from a supposed "disciple" of Christ . .. lol okay whatever.

LOL, vulgarity? You must be a Utah Mormon?

Penis and vagina are the oppostive of vulgarity.

Valo

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:19 pm

Sarah wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:15 pm

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 1:35 pm

Sarah wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 1:25 pm

This is where I think the mistake is, in assuming that preside equals expecting or demanding submission. Preside can mean simply to watch over, to counsel, to lead in work or spiritual activities. Who decided that to preside means to expect submission?

lol, You see it but you don't want to see it.

Because you can't preside without submission.

I'm going to make this simple and I use this example not to show relationships between men and women but to show the reality of preside and submit.

A father "presides" over Scripture reading. What do you do when your 5 year old says no! and starts a tantrum? The child is not submitting, the child is in a state of rebellion. Okay so you claim the father is to "lead". Well you're 5-year-old doesn't want to "follow"! What do you do?

Now a brute could yell and scream at the child and stomp his feet and say "I'm the leader you must submit!".
A non-leader could just say, well I guess you don't want to submit so we won't do anything (which means the father is now submitting HIS will to the child's will).
A leader could tell the child, go to your room I will not tolerant this rebellion.

The point remains you simply cannot "preside" over someone who isn't willing to "submit". The person who is unwilling to submit will simply throw a tantrum-or as an adult cause problems, they will make it so hard that the leader cannot "preside".

So yes, presiding means you expect submission. If you don't you won't lead.

I think we need to start thinking about how to preside without expecting submission. I think presiding is different than forming rules or boundaries and enforcing those boundaries. That is what a policeman does. Husband and wife should counsel together to make those rules and boundaries with their children and enforce them. You are arguing that presiding means you have the right to make rules for your wife and she is obligated to follow those rules.
Should I as a mother expect my children to submit to me? Does that mean that I preside over my children. Interesting that nowhere in the proclamation does it say that the mother presides over her children. But under your definition a mother would preside over her children if it is her right to expect submission. Maybe we should change it to father and mother preside over their families. This puts more responsibility on the mother which many women may not want to have yet. And I do think there is purpose for the man having this right to preside, otherwise he might just let his wife do all the work.

Of course a mother presides over her children.

You simply can't have one without the other. I don't understand why it is so hard.

Go for it, try presiding when you don't have submission-it can not happen. It is an impossibility. You can't have a leader without a follower, you can't preside without submission. It is simply impossible.

Do you look at your wife's obedience to you the same as you look at your children's obedience to you? Do you treat your wife differently when it comes to making up rules for her to follow, than when making rules for your children?

Do you see how in the case with children we need to teach them to obey so that they learn the concept of obedience, and because they are innately selfish and will not act out of love and responsibility. We are trying to ultimately teach them how to love and be responsible. Do you look at your wife the same way, in that she needs to learn to obey you so that she will learn loving and responsible behavior? Do you feel the need to teach your wife obedience in the same way you need to teach your children that? Because this is curse and punishment of the wife having to learn obedience, being put in relation to the man as a child. It is the curse that men must recognize should be lifted, because at some point we are not children and can be trusted to be true partners.

Eve gave you the chance to be a lawgiver, learn how to govern, and lift up your wife to your level. Eve disobeyed and so the punishment was to be under the rule of man and learn obedience. She has no choice to obey you just like a child has no choice.

The Israelites were given more laws and rules because they could not live the higher laws of love and self-rule. They needed to grow up, and progress, just like our children do. It should be recognized that women can grow up and self-govern under love, without needing a parent there. God is our parent. We all need to simply let God be the parent and not insist that husband can be the parent to the wife.

SettingDogStar wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 3:02 pm

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:56 pm

SettingDogStar wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:54 pm

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:52 pm
It's what those who don't have eyes to see do.

Something has changed between 1950s and today. But I guess it was just "technology" that made the world more wicked.

But again you’ve presented no evidence! You just assume that this is the connecting doctrine without saying why this must be. It could be literally any number of things or thousands of things together.

Okay, fine put forth some ideas then!

—Technology and the internet have caused pornography to escalate which destroys families, evidenced by the fact that there are therapists solely for the reason for teach couples to overcome this addiction.

—Drugs have become even more accessible (and legal in some cases) and have also been the cause of divorce rates to increase and families broken. As evidenced by a dear family friend and family members.

—Abortion’s cause maritial issues (I can provide evidence) and with the tech to do it quicker and safer now they are far more prominent.

Could be these all working together, could be one in particular.

1) Possible, but internet pornography has only been around for about 20 years.
All the questions I mentioned were in the tank prior to pornography. Yes it has made things worse, but something was already happening in the 1990s.
2) That's a statement with no basis in facts-more accessible how? Drugs were already accessible pretty easily prior to the internet.
3) Okay, we might be onto something with abortion.
How did abortion become legal? Who were the major groups pushing for abortion? Why did those major groups want abortion? What was their message about abortion?

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/stu ... n?lang=eng
Given in 1971, abortion legalized in 1973.

The first one is ancillary, as in pornography was not widely accessible nor used prior the late 1990s-something else was already occurring. But yes, it has definitely accelerated things. 2nd is also ancillary, 3rd-you are getting warmer!

Sarah wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 3:05 pm

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:19 pm

Sarah wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:15 pm

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 1:35 pm
lol, You see it but you don't want to see it.

Because you can't preside without submission.

I'm going to make this simple and I use this example not to show relationships between men and women but to show the reality of preside and submit.

A father "presides" over Scripture reading. What do you do when your 5 year old says no! and starts a tantrum? The child is not submitting, the child is in a state of rebellion. Okay so you claim the father is to "lead". Well you're 5-year-old doesn't want to "follow"! What do you do?

Now a brute could yell and scream at the child and stomp his feet and say "I'm the leader you must submit!".
A non-leader could just say, well I guess you don't want to submit so we won't do anything (which means the father is now submitting HIS will to the child's will).
A leader could tell the child, go to your room I will not tolerant this rebellion.

The point remains you simply cannot "preside" over someone who isn't willing to "submit". The person who is unwilling to submit will simply throw a tantrum-or as an adult cause problems, they will make it so hard that the leader cannot "preside".

So yes, presiding means you expect submission. If you don't you won't lead.

I think we need to start thinking about how to preside without expecting submission. I think presiding is different than forming rules or boundaries and enforcing those boundaries. That is what a policeman does. Husband and wife should counsel together to make those rules and boundaries with their children and enforce them. You are arguing that presiding means you have the right to make rules for your wife and she is obligated to follow those rules.
Should I as a mother expect my children to submit to me? Does that mean that I preside over my children. Interesting that nowhere in the proclamation does it say that the mother presides over her children. But under your definition a mother would preside over her children if it is her right to expect submission. Maybe we should change it to father and mother preside over their families. This puts more responsibility on the mother which many women may not want to have yet. And I do think there is purpose for the man having this right to preside, otherwise he might just let his wife do all the work.

Of course a mother presides over her children.

You simply can't have one without the other. I don't understand why it is so hard.

Go for it, try presiding when you don't have submission-it can not happen. It is an impossibility. You can't have a leader without a follower, you can't preside without submission. It is simply impossible.

But to you look at your wife's obedience to you the same as you look at your children's obedience to you? Do you treat your wife differently than your children?

Well I would certainly I do! If my wife rolled around on the floor and threw her arms in the air every time she didn't get what she wanted, we'd have big problems!

She is an adult and responsible adults should know how to submit to other responsible adults in positions of authority without tantrums.

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 3:08 pm

SettingDogStar wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 3:02 pm

catcatinabox wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:56 pm

SettingDogStar wrote: ↑October 3rd, 2019, 2:54 pm

But again you’ve presented no evidence! You just assume that this is the connecting doctrine without saying why this must be. It could be literally any number of things or thousands of things together.

Okay, fine put forth some ideas then!

—Technology and the internet have caused pornography to escalate which destroys families, evidenced by the fact that there are therapists solely for the reason for teach couples to overcome this addiction.

—Drugs have become even more accessible (and legal in some cases) and have also been the cause of divorce rates to increase and families broken. As evidenced by a dear family friend and family members.

—Abortion’s cause maritial issues (I can provide evidence) and with the tech to do it quicker and safer now they are far more prominent.

Could be these all working together, could be one in particular.

1) Possible, but internet pornography has only been around for about 20 years.
All the questions I mentioned were in the tank prior to pornography. Yes it has made things worse, but something was already happening in the 1990s.
2) That's a statement with no basis in facts-more accessible how? Drugs were already accessible pretty easily prior to the internet.
3) Okay, we might be onto something with abortion.
How did abortion become legal? Who were the major groups pushing for abortion? Why did those major groups want abortion? What was their message about abortion?

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/stu ... n?lang=eng
Given in 1971, abortion legalized in 1973.

The first one is ancillary, as in pornography was not widely accessible nor used prior the late 1990s-something else was already occurring. But yes, it has definitely accelerated things. 2nd is also ancillary, 3rd-you are getting warmer!

I’m not saying that these were the perfect culprits. But you have to admit that this “equality doctrine” isnt the only thing making these things (such as divorce) go up.