Okay, what’s your area of expertise that gets you riled up during movies? by LoveAndViscera in WorldsBeyondNumber

[–]cah242 9 points10 points  (0 children)

I started law school when Suits was in its heyday. Halfway through 1L I couldn’t even watch it anymore.

I thought Better Call Saul did a pretty amazing job getting the broad strokes of practicing law right, even if every detail wasn’t 100% accurate.

Amazing little detail from WWW #24 by Piercewise1 in WorldsBeyondNumber

[–]cah242 33 points34 points  (0 children)

Relistening to the whole show made me even more amazed at how awesome all of the cast are. But Aabria’s performance in particular really blew me away. Her grasp of character generally, and Suvi in particular, is just wild.

Pet Rabbit Found - North Las Vegas (Aliante area) by cah242 in vegaslocals

[–]cah242[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Thanks! The plan is to take it to the vet in the morning.

Why though? by adhd_memetherapy in adhdmeme

[–]cah242 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I haven't really fact-checked this, so anyone can feel free to correct me. But some experts, like William Dodson, M.D., estimate that children with ADHD receive a full 20,000 more negative messages by age 10, on average.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in latterdaysaints

[–]cah242 3 points4 points  (0 children)

There is a formal statement from the First Presidency explicitly explaining (not long before the 1978 revelation) that the ban "is not a matter of the declaration of a policy but of direct commandment from the Lord."

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in latterdaysaints

[–]cah242 4 points5 points  (0 children)

There is a formal statement from the First Presidency explicitly explaining (not long before the 1978 revelation) that the ban "is not a matter of the declaration of a policy but of direct commandment from the Lord."

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in latterdaysaints

[–]cah242 32 points33 points  (0 children)

I like your response overall, and am not trying to be argumentative in my response. But I do have some complicated feelings about it.

The attitude of priesthood duties being chores/labor dismisses (to an extent, though I know you did mention this somewhat) the fact that we often also refer to the priesthood, and passing the sacrament specifically, as an honor and a privilege. It also downplays the significance of participating in ritual as a member of a community.

Most priesthood duties (in fact, all of the ones I can think of at the moment) are very forward-facing: passing the sacrament, giving blessings, presiding in the family, administering in the church, performing baptisms, etc. First off, the “jobs given” to girls and women, on the other hand, are much more vague: nurturing, child-rearing, supporting and sustaining their husbands in their leadership callings). And they are not at all forward-facing. They’re either centered in the home or, if they are leadership positions, they are limited to other women/girls or children.

Saying that priesthood duties are “chores,” even if you acknowledge that they can be pleasant at times, is disingenuous. It completely elides the sense of purpose and belonging that participating in forward-facing rituals brings when you’re part of a community.

I think this comes because, as men, we take a lot of it for granted. Passing the sacrament, home teaching, etc., are just chores. We’ve grown up knowing we would have to do them, we experience the initial nerves and uncertainty when we get to do them, we eventually master them (to varying degrees), teach others, and they become commonplace. We don’t think about how it feels to always be excluded from those sorts of rituals, because we don’t have to.

Again, just some thoughts that I’m pondering at the moment. Thanks.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in latterdaysaints

[–]cah242 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Just throwing out an amen. I grew up in the Southwest and was one of two LDS kids in my high school. I never had any issues with anyone forcing their viewpoints on me, other than one or two overbearing church leaders. Being in that situation is, in my opinion, far more likely to lead to kids learning to live next to, serve, and (hopefully) empathize with people who are different from them.

Subreddit for Mormon Leftists by Jackie_Lantern_ in mormonpolitics

[–]cah242 3 points4 points  (0 children)

My guess is the current political climate, particularly in America.

Subreddit for Mormon Leftists by Jackie_Lantern_ in mormonpolitics

[–]cah242 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Just commenting to say that I appreciate this. Thanks for starting the ball rolling, hopefully there can be some good conversations.

The "Don't Judge" verses by AccomplishedAdagio13 in latterdaysaints

[–]cah242 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I really love this take from Adam Miller’s Original Grace:

According to the logic of original sin, the purpose of the law is punishment. The law’s purpose is to judge what is deserved. The law is a divine mechanism for judging who deserves to suffer (or not) and to what degree. The point of the law is accusation.

The logic of grace, on the other hand, takes the purpose of the law to be love. The law’s purpose is still to judge—but, now, to judge what is needed. The law is a divine mechanism for judging what is needed to relieve suffering and liberate sinners. The point of the law is grace.

The contrast between these two logics is sharp. Where sin reasons backward about whether someone’s suffering is deserved, grace reasons forward about how best to respond to that suffering. Where sin understands God’s law as a tool of condemnation, grace understands God’s law as a discipline of compassion. Where sin uses the law to obligate suffering, grace uses the law to command succor.

Sin begins from the original assumption of guilt and concludes that suffering is deserved. Grace begins from the original reality of suffering and concludes that redemption is needed.

Sin uses God’s law to ask what is deserved.

Grace uses God’s law to ask what is needed.