Then I guess it is a good thing that everyone has shown good manners in here.
Are you guys completely cool with your kids dating/marrying someone of a different race?
- Thread starter Sandy Braille
- Start date
Then I guess it is a good thing that everyone has shown good manners in here.
I believe God exists.
Step one, once we can both agree that this is the beginning of my beliefs, we can go on to what I believe the character of said God is.
With me so far?
This analogy assumes that these callings are primarily for the benefit of the congregation rather than the individual. I'm not assuming that, so I suppose we are still at an impasse.
I will continue to consider you over-analytic and hyper-sensitive, and you can continue to consider me misguided and foolish. Fair enough?
Telling someone else what their motivations are is not good manners. Were you raised by wolves?
I apologize to all the wolves in here for indicating they may be less civilized than humans.
No questions so far (at least, none relevant to this discussion).
If the callings are not there primarily for the benefit of the congregation, why have them at all?
The world continues to turn.
So are we on the same page or aren't we? No point in continuing on if we are not in agreement.
Using language to slight what someone else believes is also no good manners. I don't think you should be giving lectures on manners, and that's a fact!
Last edited:
I have already answered this question. Please refer to post #348.
The fact that you are (re)asking me this question leads me to believe that you are not interested in understanding my position, so much as looking for some way to trap me, so you can "win".
I am not interested in discussion as competition.
Someone telling you the opinion they have formed of what your intentions are from the conversations you two have had is not bad manners. To pretend so shows either intellectual dishonest (which I do not think you are doing) or that the person in question has bought into the rubbish of political correctness and all that it entails. Did they insult you? No. Did they curse at you? No. Did they belittle you? No. They simply said this is my opinion of your intentions based on what we have talked about. It was not presented as fact. If that hurt your feelings than you need to toughen up and not be over sensitive as they were showing manners within the norm. To suggest otherwise is to play into that PC way of speaking where you never say anything that anyone else can disagree with out of a false belief that it is offensive. In my opinion PC language and culture is hogwash.
Here you go One Brow. If you have mutliple people coming to the same general conclussion about your intentions in a certain discussion, all done in a polite way, than perhaps you should rethink the way that you word your replies.
Yes, I accept that you believe in God.
Your post on #348 translates to to me as reading, 'God wanted something for men to to that would being them closer, so God decided that a church hierarchy, otherwise unnecessary, was the best way to accomplish this'. Hence, my question on why the otherwise unnecessary callings were created at all, when surely there would have been better ways of accomplishing the same thing.
Of course, maybe you meant to say something like 'the church hierarchy is necessary, and only men can be in it because women get to be mommies'. If you can't see why that offers no good reason to separate out the Mormon church as less sexist than other churches, I'm not sure what else to say on that. It's pretty clearly an arbitrary restriction enforcing an unequal power structure over an issue that doesn't apply to, say, a childless woman of 50. Can childless women become bishops after menopause?
It's also possible you meant something else entirely, and you might even deign to tell me what that was. What did not happen is that I read your reply and treated it as being blank.
I disagree. Slighting a person for what they believe is bad manners. Slighting a bad belief is acting with integrity toward the believer. It doesn't mean it should happen in every post or every topic, but it would be dishonest to hide it when it is appropriate.
There is a difference between stating what your impression it, and stating what another person is.
Acceptable: Stoked, you are arguing as if you are not smart enough to see the difference person A telling person B what person A thinks, and person A telling person B what person B thinks.
Unacceptable: Stoked, you obviously are not smart enough to see the difference person A telling person B what person A thinks, and person A telling person B what person B thinks, and from now on I'll just assume you are not smart enough.
See the difference (just to be clear, I think you are smart enough to see that difference)? Go back and check, JazzSpazz that he would assume I was intentionally saying erroneous things. So, I called him out. Why you got involved in that, you'll have to answer.
Actually, yes. Being called a liar is one of the few things you can say that I will take personally as an insult.
Except, it was.
So it is good manners when you are honest but not someone else. Got it.
That I made no objection to how Bronco70 worded his response, while I made an objection to an earlier response, would clue in many people that the responses were saying things differently.
I am certain you are smarter than this post makes you appear.
Edit to add: For example, I did not say TheBlackSwordsman was exhibiting bad manners for his dig at my beliefs.
I was certain you would understand I was messing with you. Appears one of us was mistaken.
I still think you are wrong about Jazzspazz giving you his opinion of your intentions.