posted
And Solitary Rush. And while the page was redirecting back, it had something about "On August 22, Let Sexy Jesus Rock You". Seriously.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm seeing an add for something called "Bella Lara", which includes the text "Collect, Activate, Play", "Beauty Comes from Within", and "Discover the Magic", and features a white horse, what looks like a bit of a rainbow, and stars on a purple field. Very strange.
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
Boon
unregistered
posted
It's "Bella Sara." Jen is a fan and contributes to their market share.
Edit: to clarify, Bella Sara is collector cards (similar to pokemon, I understand) that feature horses in all their real and imagined variety. Each card has a code th kids can enter online to get another virtual horse in their online stable, and each card has "horseshoes," points they can use to "purchase" stories, decorations for their "rooms," etc.
IP: Logged |
I think it's in our nature to try to relate to other people. If one avenue of relation is shut down - such as shared religious beliefs - I think it's normal to see if there's another avenue open. I think that's what Glenn was trying to do. Saying, "I think I can see why those beliefs might beneficial even if someone doesn't share your reasons for holding them. This might be some kind of common ground!" For the other person to disagree that there's any shared ground there is fine, i suppose, but for the other person to claim that this is condescendingly "explaining it to people who are conversant with it and live by its precepts" might not be justified. I don't think that's what Glenn was trying to do.
I think there is a difference between saying "I think I understand the underlying reason for your superstition" and "I think I can see some benefits from your beliefs even though I do not share them." That someone got angry suggests to me that they perceived Glenn's comments to be more like the former statement. From Glenn's statements here I think he meant it more like the latter.
If Lisa or Tante are saying that they don't appreciate any outside perspective on their beliefs at all, and that any such commentary is disrespectful...then I think they are being needlessly prickly and a bit unrealistic. I don't think that's quite what they are saying though.
Posts: 4287 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: Tante hints at a rationale I've seen many Jews use: that one of the most important "reasons" for kashrut, beyond the obvious "God said so," is to keep Jews different and thus relatively isolated from the rest of the world. You can argue that most successful religions have similar rituals and traditions that serve a similar purpose.
Do you really think that I am isolated from the rest of the world?
Posts: 10397 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
A bit, yeah. You're "artificially" limited in where you can live, when you can interact with people, what you can do when you interact with them, etc. If the connotative meanings of "isolation" don't work for you, though, I'm okay with another word. I believe that some Mormons find "set apart" to be complementary.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:A bit, yeah. You're "artificially" limited in where you can live, when you can interact with people, what you can do when you interact with them, etc. If the connotative meanings of "isolation" don't work for you, though, I'm okay with another word. I believe that some Mormons find "set apart" to be complementary.
*snort* That ain't isolation, Tom. That's just a different set of rules. I don't like popcorn. In fact, I can't stand to eat it. Now that I think about it, everyone I know when they go to the movies will (sometimes, at least, and assuming it's good popcorn) get a bag and chow down every so often, whereas I never do.
I'm not isolated from the world.
For all my life, I've never been a smoker-even when it was often regarded as popular. I didn't hang around smokers, and didn't smoke myself. Was I isolated from the world?
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I live in an integrated, multicultural small town, work in an urban area with people from all backgrounds, count among my friends Jew and non-Jews, religious Christians and atheists, wealthy and working class, married and single and civilly unioned, straight, gay, lesbian. I spend way too much time on the internet with people from different backgrounds and beliefs.
But because I value and want to honor my cultural heritage I'm isolated?
Huh. For some definitions of "isolated", I suppose. Just not mine.
Posts: 10397 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:That ain't isolation, Tom. That's just a different set of rules.
In China, not drinking tea is isolation. From another perspective, imagine how isolating it would be to be the only person trying to keep completely kosher in a small town in Alabama where none of the restaurants are kosher-certified and none of the groceries carry more than a handful of kosher products; as previously noted, the demands of kashrut (and similar social rituals in other groups) are largely responsible for the continuance of Jewish neighborhoods.
quote:For all my life, I've never been a smoker-even when it was often regarded as popular.
Try not wearing garments to a job interview in Provo. The "goal" here is isolation from the mainstream -- which is why so many of the more casual rules lose importance once a culture gains regional dominance.
-------
quote:For some definitions of "isolated", I suppose. Just not mine.
*nod* "Isolated" doesn't have to mean "unhappy," or even "isolated from everything."
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've seen enough people make comments about "panty lines" to recognize that it doesn't take nakedness to recognize garments. Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tante Shvester: The Jewish tradition is ancient. The Jewish people have maintained their unique culture and language for thousands of years -- without proselytizing -- despite the view of the majority that in these "modern times", there is no place for such superstitious claptrap. The argument that these backward traditions have no place in an age of science and reason was put forth in ancient Greece and Rome, in renaissance Europe, and in contemporary times. Yet, the Jewish people refuse to disappear and have their cultural distinctiveness absorbed into the prevailing culture. Part of this has to do with laws, like Kashrut, that set the Jewish people apart. While it is possible to be a lone Jew in a city, and to adhere to Jewish law, it would mean having no easy access to kosher food, a minyan, and a mikveh. If a Jew wants to be able to have access to kosher food, he really needs to be a part of a Jewish community. Thus, Jews aggregate, and pass on their traditions of Torah study, Talmud scholarship, and their culture to the next generation. The system has worked for thousands of years, through a chain of my ancestors stretching back farther than I can trace. I respect that tradition, and am proud to be a part of it and to continue the chain in raising my son to our traditions.
Noow you've made the point you disliked so much before, haven't you? I mean, I agree with you, I can see all of those reasons why religious laws have survived, and those are all very functional in keeping the jewish community and faith alive. It seems perfectly logical to me. Would it insult you for me to see all those same things in the jewish law and say: "ok, yeah, I get that."
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Try not wearing garments to a job interview in Provo.
It's not *that* bad. I live in Provo and am an atheist and while I know there are some people here that would note absence of garments as a negative for prospective employees, they are in the minority.
Posts: 3275 | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
I went out to dinner with relatives who do not keep kosher last night. In the town they live in and I had last been in several years ago. So we checked a website, found which of the local places met my criteria (luckily, the primary contender was actually a place near them that they like), and went there.
They didn't get insulted that I don't eat in their home, there was no discussion about kashrus (except when my aunt confirmed that I am as strict as my mother and my other aunt), there was simply mutual acceptance and accommodation. (Sort of like how when my uncle wouldn't let me pay the check, I stopped arguing. Even though I had invited them and had every intention of paying.)
Do you find that your keeping kosher affects your relationships outside of family? It is one thing for Jewish, or non jewish family members to accommodate your needs, but this practice surely guides your life choices in many ways. You couldn't ever share an apartment with someone who didn't keep kosher, you couldn't live in a dorm at a university that didn't keep kosher, you couldn't visit a country where kosher foods are not available, etc. Do you pick your friends according to who will be able to accommodate you? I don't know what that's like, so I don't know if it's easy or difficult to live according to that set of rules.
I can see how it would set a person apart, but at the same time I know vegetarians who you never notice because they're not loud or picky about cuisine. Then there's my aunt, who has an unknown number of rotating allergies, that correspond, I suspect, to how much attention she needs at any given time.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't have a problem being friends with rivka and eating dinner with her, even though it means we go to her part of town and she doesn't come to us. It's sometimes a slight inconvenience, but I value her friendship enough to respect her beliefs and accomodate them by eating kosher when I eat with her.
And she doesn't serve us desserts with coffee or tea or wine in them, which is good of her. Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: I've seen enough people make comments about "panty lines" to recognize that it doesn't take nakedness to recognize garments.
I've heard several talks on modesty from ward and stake leaders that say, "If someone can tell you're wearing garments, you're not modest enough." Either the clothes are too tight, too low- (or high-) cut, or too thin.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tante Shvester: I live in an integrated, multicultural small town, work in an urban area with people from all backgrounds, count among my friends Jew and non-Jews, religious Christians and atheists, wealthy and working class, married and single and civilly unioned, straight, gay, lesbian. I spend way too much time on the internet with people from different backgrounds and beliefs.
But because I value and want to honor my cultural heritage I'm isolated?
Huh. For some definitions of "isolated", I suppose. Just not mine.
I believe these are some of the reasons that Jewish intellectuals were vilified as "separate" from the European Romantic tradition at the turn of the century. Because they lived not in isolated or rural enclaves, but among urban multicultural populations, they were thought to have rejected or been always out of touch with the "soul" I guess you could say, of the mystic-romantic world of Germany and Austria, and other places that so embraced the idea of traditional, rural living at the time.
Now, the same things that distinguished some of these people as great artists and thinkers was the very thing they became hated for. They seemed to be part of a strict group, but their art and thinking said otherwise- they borrowed much of the style and flourish of the romantic world and turned it into something else. As an athiest, I can see so many similarities between the two groups: how they seek out the same things, think in so many of the same ways, and do so all because they must be, in some respect, in a place with people who they can live with comfortably.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
to go back to the initial confusion, I have to express that I agree with scifibum in that the comments (as explained by Glenn) could have been misinterpreted, but when viewed in the second manner seem at worst neutral.
The wedding-ring example presented makes an interesting point, though I see some important differences. The wedding ring is a symbol of a greater concept, and so I can see people opposing someone wearing a plain gold ring for hygiene reasons, because that in some way lessens the impact of that symbol. However, the important distinction here is that the wedding ring is a human invention intended only to be a symbol.
When it comes to complying with divine law (at least in my mind) you can't sully that compliance by others complying for other reasons. If you're keeping kosher because G*d told you to, then the fact that I may or may not keep kosher because it happens to be more healthy (imo) should have no impact on your actions.
So take another example of divine law: Thou shall honor your mother and father (or whatever exact wording is appropriate). If an atheist started talking to you about how he thought that was a good idea because it generally betters society by creating a more respectful populous would that be taken as offensive or condescending? What if instead it was a Christian (who believes that they also are called to comply with that precept because G*d said so)?
Admittedly, if someone tried arguing that whatever reason absolutely was the reason G*d set forth that law, then I can see taking offense, but if it's just a statement that apart from whatever divine logic was present the law makes sense, then the offense seems misplaced.
Do you (Rivka, Tante, Lisa etc) think you're more likely to take conversations on Kosher laws in a bad light because you feel that it is misunderstood and/or needlessly justified? Or would you similarly lean towards being put-off by discussions of any other divine law?
Posts: 1038 | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Kwea: He might have taken it to mean you needed a secular reason to follow spiritual law...which is what it sounded like to me as well....and that defeats the purpose of faith.
For many people, this is indeed the reason why faith has no meaning.
And for even more it is why the word faith needs no definition.
Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mucus: Mormons can't drink tea?! Really?
BlackBlade, if you're reading this, you did missionary work to China right? How did Chinese converts react to having to give up tea?
Really sorry it took me this long to see this post Mucus. I didn't read anything after it either so somebody may have answered your question already.
First off I must respectfully disagree with your interpretation of what constitutes the state of China.
Joking aside yes I did missionary work in Taiwan. Tea was certainly one of the more difficult things for potential converts to understand. Both because tea is a quintessential element of Chinese culture, and because there are traditional beliefs concerning it's healthy properties as well as some published studies extolling some of the benefits of tea.
But of course the Chinese are too polite to say a belief no matter how unconventional is crazy to your face.
But it's really not as bad as you think. Church guidelines concerning abstaining from tea refer only to tea made from leaves, so green and red teas. Grain, flower, and fruit teas are perfectly acceptable. Fortunately in China they have a jillion teas based on all these things and they are delicious, so giving up green tea is only difficult IMO insofar as socially it's tough to explain to friends and family why you don't drink green tea. Green tea is certainly still "the tea" that everyone serves to all guests. I spent a considerable amount of time coming up with ways to politely stop a host from serving me the wrong tea without embarrassing them.
It was also difficult for potential converts to give up tea prior to baptism. Parents come over and expect green/red tea and then question why their child is not drinking it with them. It's easy to see Mormonism as a "Western Religion" when it required converts to give up something that is seen as so Chinese. I actually did have potential converts who needed only to give up tea in order to receive baptism and just could not take that step. Either intellectually it did not make sense, or the social pressure was too great for them.
edit: Root teas are also OK provided they are not mixed with leaf teas. Ginseng tea would be permissable. I remember getting a box of ginseng tea with ginger flavoring and giving it to the security guard at my apartment complex. He LOVED me after that.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:It just cracks me up that you are willing to take this stand based on "something you heard somewhere" that you have no idea of whether it is correct or not, but disregard people who are telling you straight out, based on expertise, that you are mistaken.
While the emphasis on something I heard somewhere was yours, it could have been mine. I put it there on purpose, not because I'm "taking a stand," but because I'm willing to give it credence. That is, I don't dismiss it just because my source isn't authoritative. I thought I made that clear enough.
quote:Sigh. So, my only choices here are in which way I prefer to be disrespected?
quote:I wouldn't be flattered that some non-Jew told me that I wasn't just being superstitious but that he was able to see some reasonable explanation for my faith. I, too, would be annoyed at the condescension.
Once again, I find this confusing. It seems weird that an attempt to understand and validate a tradition can be seen as condescension. You choose to see that as being disrespected, but it seems to me that respect is in the eye of the respector, not in the eye of the respected. From my perspective I am being respectful, not disrespectful.
quote:Again, I understand that you and Glenn would say such things in the belief that you were actually being more respectful. But even if you didn't realize it, what's really going on is that you're so unwilling to respect our choices for what they are that you have to put your own explanations on them in order to treat us respectfully about it.
This is a good synopsis, I guess, except that if it's true, then it essentially means I'm not being allowed to try, which I feel is like laying a trap. It's not that I'm unwilling to accept your choices. It's that I don't understand them. And it's one thing if my attempts are based in pure ignorance and don't deserve validation. But it's another thing to act as though I was being intentionally rude.
quote:I have to say that, Glenn, don't take this the wrong way, but your persistence in insisting that what you said shouldn't have engendered bad feelings suggests that you might have been kind of persistent with the guy you were talking to as well. Did he start out furious, or did he get madder as you kept trying to explain what you were trying to say?
Let me divide this into two sections, and answer the second question first. As far as I could tell his fury came out of nowhere. It didn't feel like he sent me any signals that I'd strayed into uncomfortable territory, he was just suddenly angry that I'd even consider that there might be a health reason behind it. At that point I knew that I needed to extricate myself from the situation, but because the concepts are so foreign to me, everything I said just dug me in deeper. And I couldn't understand why he didn't see that I was trying to apologize and extricate myself from the conversation. If he'd just dismissed me, I could have walked away, but because he was confrontational, I didn't know how to, which just made it worse.
As for my insistence that what I said shouldn't have engendered bad feelings, well first, my insistence comes from an attempt to understand. People are driven to find answers, and this is a problem that evades my understanding.
Now, I understand that I will never understand what it means to believe in God, unless I come to believe in God. And that's different than if a theist but gentile attempted to understand the same thing about Jews. But if there's a concept that replicates religious feeling in me it is that people should attempt to understand each other. That's what I'm trying to do. And if being persistent in that regard is seen as rude, all I can do is apologize.
Posts: 3735 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by lobo: I have never heard of an "exception" for using tea if prescribed by a doctor. I suppose medicinal marijuana is ok also??
I had always heard the exception for medical use as why it's ok for me to have nyquil (which contains alcohol). So, I would vote yes on medicinal marijuana- however, I have no actual knowledge on that front and would say that someone should meet with their bishop to make that decision.
Posts: 2223 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
We are instructed to follow the law of the land. Since marijuana is illegal even when prescribed by a doctor, that would not be allowed.
Cocaine is legal when prescribed, so that would be allowed.
BB, I thought red tea was the same as bush tea? Bush tea is not tea, it's an herb, and is allowed (AFAIK.)
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
What about yerba matte? Is that ok for mormons to drink? It does contain caffeine and a number of other stimulants.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: For many people, this is indeed the reason why faith has no meaning.
quote:And for even more it is why the word faith needs no definition. [/QB]
I don't allow my opinions to be ruled by consensus. This is the stupidest of all religious arguments, and it defines the fundamental problem with religion, in my humble opinion. I can understand and accept and be tolerant of many many things, but this is beyond the pale.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: What about yerba matte? Is that ok for mormons to drink? It does contain caffeine and a number of other stimulants.
Yes, the Saints in Argentina drink it. Though the missionaries are not supposed to, that is clarified to them that it's because drinking it can be an all-day social affair, not because it's not compliant with the Word of Wisdom.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mucus: BB: Sorry, I thought you did some missionary work in China proper, I might have mixed it up with some recreational travel.
The description you gave is pretty interesting, I was curious and I think that covers it.
ketchupqueen: I think red tea is just green tea but more fermented. (nvm, covered now)
The LDS church is very strict on cooperating with the Chinese government in regards to proselyting and making arrangements for members who move to the mainland. I see the wisdom in it, and in fact it actually bugs me now when I read about protestants getting arrested for smuggling bibles in or for secretly preaching. I know there is a long precedent for this, but it definitely sets back the efforts of everyone else.
It seems our church is using the strategy of doing service in China, cultivating, "guan xi" in the hopes that sooner than later the door will open because the Chinese open it.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: ... It seems our church is using the strategy of doing service in China, cultivating, "guan xi" in the hopes that sooner than later the door will open because the Chinese open it.
Hmmm, how do I put this delicately?
I for one also look forward to the day that China won't have any barriers to outside religions. However, we probably have different hopes for what that result will ultimately look like, religion-wise.
But in the meantime, I respect your efforts and what seem to be our shared ideals Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'll say I find the idea of causing family division over silly issues like what kind of tea a person can drink to be less than encouraging. If it's ok to drink matte, I am surprised that Mormons are not disturbed by the inconsistency. Any child, when confronted with the terms of this rule, when be right in asking: "why?"
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
That's the whole point of faith. They teach their children that we shouldn't try to understand God's motives, but trust that he's got good ones and follow his rules in good faith.
I was always taught to question, so religion and me haven't really worked out.
Posts: 1314 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
However, I also believe that I can recieve confirmation of anything I need confirmation on through the Holy Spirit.
Personally, I feel that following the Word of Wisdom has provided me with more spiritual and mental and emotional benefits than physical. That's JMO, though.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Launchywiggin: I was always taught to question . . .
quote:Originally posted by ketchupqueen: I was taught to question, too.
Well, me too. In fact, Talmudic scholarship is all about questioning. For me, though, I've been for the most part satisfied with the answers to my questions. I do not come from a religious background, and my family of origin does not keep kosher, but, in my own search for the right way to live my life and in the questions I've asked and the answers I've gotten, it seems like the right thing for me. I've never tried to convince anyone else that they ought to follow the same life choices I have made, but I feel that my choices are right for me. I have a lot more to learn, it is true. But I don't think it is fair to say that I follow the religious law because I am not willing or able to question it, or because I am incapable of free and independent thought. It was a conscious decision, freely made and considered.
Respectfully, if you feel that it is a decision that makes no sense for you, well then, I'd say you ought not to live by it. We are all free to make our own choices and abide by them, as long as they don't harm other people. That's part of what is so puzzling to me about the reaction I've gotten here. Why do you care what I eat or don't? If you don't like it, then eat what you want. I don't see how I'm hurting anyone. I'm certainly not demanding that the rest of the world cater to my preferences, as has been implied here. If there is any hardship, it is entirely my own, and, therefore, really nobody's business but my own.
Posts: 10397 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Church guidelines concerning abstaining from tea refer only to tea made from leaves, so green and red teas
Woe, That's a novel interpretation of church guidelines that I've never heard before. There are lots of herbal teas made from leaves (mint tea for example) which are considered "legal" for mormons.
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah, I've never heard "made from leaves" as the defining line. I've always heard "made from the tea plant."
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:I know vegetarians who you never notice because they're not loud or picky about cuisine. Then there's my aunt, who has an unknown number of rotating allergies, that correspond, I suspect, to how much attention she needs at any given time.
I don't know, that sounded kind of like an implication to me.
Posts: 21182 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
