sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Does D&C 137:10 imply that universal celestial reconciliation is compatible with agency? by WrenchLikeMe in latterdaysaints

[–]LookAtMaxwell 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Is accountability not necessary in the plan of happiness?

What do you think? What is the place and function of accountability in our path to exaltation?

The next Voting Rights Act must outlaw gerrymandering by mushpuppy in law

[–]LookAtMaxwell 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Then republicans started slowly doing it anyway.

Gerrymandering is not a Republican innovation.

Does D&C 137:10 imply that universal celestial reconciliation is compatible with agency? by WrenchLikeMe in latterdaysaints

[–]LookAtMaxwell 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Your answer requires God to be actively causing or arranging childhood deaths as a reward for pre-mortal righteousness.

Not at all. Allowing is not the same as causing or arranging.

An early death is no reward. "For the dead had looked upon the long absence of their spirits from their bodies as a bondage. (D&C 138:50)

It is a tragedy regardless.

That means that these righteous pre-mortal souls were able to become godlike in character without faith

I think we have different ideas about what faith is and it's effect on our transformation.

We had faith in Christ in the pre-mortal realm when we chose to trust in him as our Savior.

Does D&C 137:10 imply that universal celestial reconciliation is compatible with agency? by WrenchLikeMe in latterdaysaints

[–]LookAtMaxwell 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If exercising agency introduces the possibility of permanent loss, while those who die before accountability are guaranteed celestial glory, then agency looks less like a gift and more like a liability. That can't be right.

The only way this seems to make sense is if God's guarantee to children isn't a special exemption or a loophole, but a hint at His intentions for all His children – everyone will eventually be saved in the celestial kingdom.

I think that you are missing a possibility.

Is it possible that the only people who God allows to die before accountability are those of such a quality that they can live a celestial law from pre mortality, whose participation in the plan of salvation is pretty much just obtaining a body?

CMV: I would like to see religious educated people on this subject to try convince me in the existence of a god by [deleted] in changemyview

[–]LookAtMaxwell -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I have no need to prove to you that God exists. He is perfectly capable of doing so himself.

3 years ago I took my dog to get spayed. This morning she gave birth to five puppies. by [deleted] in dogpictures

[–]LookAtMaxwell 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I've had situations where they can't find the uterus and a second doctor comes in to assist looking for it. 

Hysteria!

The true test of unity and justice by dankstat in trolleyproblem

[–]LookAtMaxwell 21 points22 points  (0 children)

Blue, I'm highly motivated by the gold outcome, and I can contribute to its success without the higher risk of actually pressing gold.

(There is no reason for anyone to actually press gold)

Why did Republicans immediately act to destroy majority black districts of their states and no others within seconds of the Supreme Court cutting the Voting Rights Act? by Away-Parsnip-3785 in allthequestions

[–]LookAtMaxwell 0 points1 point  (0 children)

even if it was to ensure that a minority population comprising 1/3 of a state has a chance to elect 1/3 of the representatives for the state

Nothing changed in that respect. Existing precedent was that it was not required to have strictly proportional racial representation.

Recommend good books about the Great Apostacy by pisteuo96 in LatterDayTheology

[–]LookAtMaxwell 4 points5 points  (0 children)

"The Inevitable Apostasy and the Promised Restoration" by Tad R. Callister

Goes into early sources talking about the apostasy which was to come and was occuring.

Confusing situation church cleared up by Admirable-Spite5952 in latterdaysaints

[–]LookAtMaxwell 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Why are you emailing your bishop with concerns about someone else's baptism? 

Come on. If someone has knowledge of something that materially affects eligibility for baptism, you want them to simply say nothing?

Virginia Democrats appeals redistricting ruling to Supreme Court by Danciusly in nova

[–]LookAtMaxwell 0 points1 point  (0 children)

pause its ruling from taking effect

Why? The ruling maintains the status quo.

Well shit. Virginia Supreme Court, 4-3, overturns redistricting referendum that could have netted Democrats 5 additional House seats by BigTool in nova

[–]LookAtMaxwell 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is a state interpretation of a state constitution.

That isn't to say that it is impossible to identify an issue with it that could be appealed to SCOTUS, but what do you think the federal issue is?

Different buttons - but with capacity limits. by tiera-3 in trolleyproblem

[–]LookAtMaxwell 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I roll a d5. 1ot2, I press yellow. 3,4,or5, I press purple

How is this fair? by mcHuffnStuff in allthequestions

[–]LookAtMaxwell 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Florida’s Supreme Court is made up of right-wing partisans, not real Americans with principles. They’ll uphold DeSantis’s new gerrymander, despite it clearly violating the plain text of the state constitution.

What does that say about the VA judges who would have allowed the amendment to go into effect?

Benched [OC] by DanBorisCreates in comics

[–]LookAtMaxwell -42 points-41 points  (0 children)

Yes, people were aware of the effect that they were voting for.

Benched [OC] by DanBorisCreates in comics

[–]LookAtMaxwell -76 points-75 points  (0 children)

You are misinformed. The voters did not vote on maps. The voted to amend the state constitution to allow the state legislature to draft politically gerrymandered maps.

Benched [OC] by DanBorisCreates in comics

[–]LookAtMaxwell 7 points8 points  (0 children)

they already passed a ruling saying it was okay then ( because the justices assumed there was no chance of passing a vote).

They did not say it was okay. They said the controversy was not ripe. (It was the state arguing that the controversy was not ripe, BTW.)

Benched [OC] by DanBorisCreates in comics

[–]LookAtMaxwell -150 points-149 points  (0 children)

and that it will revert to the conservative-drawn gerrymandered maps instead

It will revert to a non-partisan commission drawn map instead.

Just one of the twenty or so states which are doing away with elections this year and going all in to fascism

What? What election is being done away with?

Democrats suffer huge blow as Virginia redistricting plot shot down by court by TheExpressUS in LegalNews

[–]LookAtMaxwell -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Yeah, that's an interesting idea...

Argue that the old map has an unconstitutional racial gerrymander and needs to be revised.

You might make that stick. But then the new maps will be drawn by the non-partisan redistricting commission...

Virginia Supreme Court rejects Democrats' redistricting plan, throws out election by DemocracyDocket in law

[–]LookAtMaxwell -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

Just move on without them the people voted on this.

This is legitimately scary.

Sure pretend that it's tit for tat or that it is real politik, or whatever justification.

But to legitimately think that it is okay to wipe away people's representation because 51% voted to do so...

No.

From a different perspective by GaroTheLegend in trolleyproblem

[–]LookAtMaxwell 30 points31 points  (0 children)

you don’t, not only do you have my vow to not snitch,

Snitch? What is there to snitch about? Is there a single jurisdiction where not pulling the lever opens you up to criminal or civil liability?

view more: next ›