|
Post by ironbite on May 3, 2009 1:19:26 GMT -5
And I wouldn't have 3/4ths of the posts I do.
|
|
|
Post by Caitshidhe on May 3, 2009 2:01:02 GMT -5
I think that'd be true for most of us.
|
|
|
Post by dasfuchs on May 3, 2009 7:38:06 GMT -5
Come to think of it, why does PETA spend so much time hating on people who wear fur and never say a word about leather, which is far more commonplace? Because all their celebrity porn stars wear leather. Hell Pamela Anderson auctioned off her Dodge Viper, with leather seats, and donated the cash to PETA. But they're not going to turn down the cash or publicity for something as silly as ethics, now are they. PETA has ethics? I thought that was debunked with the freezer and dumpster scandals
|
|
|
Post by skyfire on May 3, 2009 8:20:42 GMT -5
Women I believe have to get permission from their sealed husband and go through some sort of unsealing ceremony (I would bow to someone who understands this better). To my knowledge, none of that is true. Most likely, whoever told you the information confused a few different matters of protocol. The church is actually opposed to divorce, preferring that the couple work out whatever issues they have w/ a counselor or other third party to assist them; the only exception to this is when one spouse is determined to be abusive. If a couple is sealed within a temple, they have to get permission from church HQ to have the sealing revoked. Church HQ generally takes a dim view on things like "we fell out of love" or many of the more common justifications people use nowadays for divorce, and so the odds of having a sealing revoked for anything other than abuse on the part of a spouse are slim. To my knowledge, there's nothing on the books saying that men and women have to go through different procedures in the event of a divorce. The point of confusion most likely comes from the protocol for situations wherein widows or widowers wish to remarry; if one spouse has passed, the other spouse may be sealed to another one if they so desire. Nope. If a person is cheating around it's regarded as being on them and no one else; if you've seen anything else, it was in error. The church pushes reconciliation and marriage counseling in such situations.
|
|
|
Post by schizophonic on May 3, 2009 9:06:31 GMT -5
Sky, I'm gonna say it one time so please read this. STOP...TELLING...BULLSHIT...STORIES! Either give us some citations or shut the hell up. Ironbite-thank you. I fixed that for you. To my knowledge, none of that is true. [Unskippable]There's your problem.[/unskippable] He wasn't even bothered by it, he just turned around really surprised/amused and asked, "Did you just touch my ass?" Yeah. I was warned for that. >.< Man. That's INSANE. I'm just picturing how screwed I'd be if anyone called sexual harassment on me. I've said all sorts of bad things to coworkers in my history of employment. Of course, they really were in jest, or just those stupid things that you realise how bad they sound AFTER they come out of your mouth.... ...Wait, that came out wrong.
|
|
|
Post by deliciousdemon on May 3, 2009 9:06:32 GMT -5
Notice how he completely ignored the request for citations, offering instead more anecdotes.
|
|
karl
New Member
Posts: 29
|
Post by karl on May 3, 2009 10:14:54 GMT -5
What the hell sort of backward pigshit thick country do you guys live in? No unions, uncontrolled insane religious groups, no sexual freedom, insipid right wing politics. What america needs is a good old fashioned armed revolution if you ask me. Instead of sitting on the internet whining about it all day go out and kick some arse.
|
|
|
Post by schizophonic on May 3, 2009 10:25:42 GMT -5
Notice how he completely ignored the request for citations, offering instead more anecdotes. Because he doesn't have citations or answers, just tangential stories.
|
|
karl
New Member
Posts: 29
|
Post by karl on May 3, 2009 10:45:23 GMT -5
Although the thought of Americans actualy going out and fighting for justice instead of just whining about how unfair it all is is quite funny in itself,you might have to turn your telly off and stop stuffing your faces with food.
|
|
|
Post by wackadoodle on May 3, 2009 10:53:50 GMT -5
tell us were you live so we can make fun of it. Until then I'm just gonna assume your French you cheese eating surrender monkey
|
|
|
Post by skyfire on May 3, 2009 11:04:08 GMT -5
Unions are actually part of the problem here in America, in that for every 2 - 3 unions that are doing their job we have another union where the membership is largely only in it for themselves.
|
|
|
Post by gotpwnt on May 3, 2009 11:11:45 GMT -5
Who gives a flip what Mormonism -- or any other religion -- has to say about an issue? When it comes to limiting the rights of others, [glow=red,2,300]I DO!!![/glow]
|
|
|
Post by antichrist on May 3, 2009 11:12:59 GMT -5
Women I believe have to get permission from their sealed husband and go through some sort of unsealing ceremony (I would bow to someone who understands this better). To my knowledge, none of that is true. Most likely, whoever told you the information confused a few different matters of protocol. The church is actually opposed to divorce, preferring that the couple work out whatever issues they have w/ a counselor or other third party to assist them; the only exception to this is when one spouse is determined to be abusive. If a couple is sealed within a temple, they have to get permission from church HQ to have the sealing revoked. Church HQ generally takes a dim view on things like "we fell out of love" or many of the more common justifications people use nowadays for divorce, and so the odds of having a sealing revoked for anything other than abuse on the part of a spouse are slim. To my knowledge, there's nothing on the books saying that men and women have to go through different procedures in the event of a divorce. The point of confusion most likely comes from the protocol for situations wherein widows or widowers wish to remarry; if one spouse has passed, the other spouse may be sealed to another one if they so desire. Nope. If a person is cheating around it's regarded as being on them and no one else; if you've seen anything else, it was in error. The church pushes reconciliation and marriage counseling in such situations. Yeah, I said I wanted it from a more knowledgeable source, you know as much about your church as you do about business.
|
|
|
Post by Vene on May 3, 2009 11:35:07 GMT -5
Unions are actually part of the problem here in America, in that for every 2 - 3 unions that are doing their job we have another union where the membership is largely only in it for themselves. I know, right. I mean, fucking unions. How dare they make it so that people don't have to work 12 hour days, 7 days a week with no minimum wage. How dare they have the gall to insist that workers have rights. And what the fuck does this have to do with your cult and its treatment of homosexuals?
|
|
|
Post by devilschaplain2 on May 3, 2009 11:46:42 GMT -5
Unions are actually part of the problem here in America, in that for every 2 - 3 unions that are doing their job we have another union where the membership is largely only in it for themselves. I know, right. I mean, fucking unions. How dare they make it so that people don't have to work 12 hour days, 7 days a week with no minimum wage. How dare they have the gall to insist that workers have rights. And what the fuck does this have to do with your cult and its treatment of homosexuals? The problem is unions! Now, why am I rambling about unions when we're supposed to be talkin' about gay marriage and the LDS Church? This does not make sense!
|
|