"A growing number of active Mormons, who have gay friends and family members are coming to the conclusion that our current leaders are as mistaken in promoting discrimination against gays and lesbians as was the Mormon hierarchy in the 60's when they opposed equal rights for people of color, and our Mormon leaders in the 70's when they opposed full legal equality for women.
"No one is asking that you condone a behavior that might violate your religious faith, but we need to allow everyone the freedom to live their life as they see fit."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080629/ap_on_re/mormon_church_gay_marriage;_ylt=AiC68A.0dZkgv4Q8y2xyzn6s0NUE
Sunday, June 29, 2008
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
Republicans...Scared of Change Since 1854, By AMBERLY
Seeing how Barack's campaign slogan is "Change," this is probably why so many of the GOP are scared to death of this candidate. I was republican for quite a few years, and I admit that I was scared of change. But now I welcome it.
I don't expect all republicans or even all mormons to get behind Barack. I do know for a fact that many republicans and mormons are supporting him because McCain is an exact replica of Bush, who has a 20% approval rating, which no one wants. Also because I have heard them say they support him.
But I never expected to see anything like this. I found this on a blog. I have so many issues with this video that I MUST post about it.
This video is a 13 minute attack against Barack Obama which is attempting to illustrate how he may be unfit to run for presidency.
I was first shocked to see that their first attack was at his name. Barack's full name being Barack Hussein Obama, was named directly after his father who was a muslim from Kenya. As the video describes this they show a disturbing picture of his father (hold on to your skirts everyone)... studying at a desk with a book. How terrible huh?
The video makes the connection that all three of his names are muslim, and muslims tend to be terrorists and the US is in a war on terror. First of all, Barack had no choice over his name. Ann Coulter, a screaming republican, calls him B. Hussein Obama. Probably to manipulate it just enough to make him sound more like Osama bin Laden, or to sound more muslim. Ann's response for that remark is "that's his name, B. Hussein Obama". No.... his name is Barack Obama. I don't believe in Jesus Christ, but even I know that it would be disrespectful to go around saying J. Christ. I'm sure Ann wouldn't like that too much, or any other screaming Republican. To make this part of the video look even more appaling and juvenile, they show pictures of muslims with decapitated heads. I just can't explain any further how disrespectful this is.
The video goes on to explain a Cuban flag with a picture of Che Guevara on it hanging in a Houston campaign office. At first even I was saying to myself "what the hell?" But it takes no longer than a second and the intelligence of a magot to find the truth of the matter. Barack's official statement regarding the matter was:
"This is a volunteer office that is not in any way controlled by the Obama campaign. We were disappointed to see this picture because it is both offensive to many Cuban-Americans -- and Americans of all backgrounds -- and because it does not reflect Senator Obama’s views. Barack Obama has been very clear in putting forward a Cuba policy that is based on one principle: freedom for the Cuban people." -- Obama Campaign.
AND
"The office featured in this video is funded by volunteers of the Barack Obama Campaign and is not an official headquarters for his campaign."
I really don't think I need to explain this further.
Barack is also criticized for not wearing a flag lapel pin on his coat. Hmmm, I didn't know that was a requirement for running for president.... oh, right, it's not. This may seem odd at first, but again, do some research people. Barack was quoted saying this regarding the matter.
"Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama says he doesn't wear an American flag lapel pin because it has become a substitute for "true patriotism" since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks... 'I'm going to try to tell the American people what I believe will make this country great, and hopefully that will be a testament to my patriotism.'"
Barack was yet again criticized, this time for the incident of not putting his hand over his heart at a ceremony where the national anthem was sung. I'm not sure as to why he didn't do that. I couldn't find an accurate reason. But I did find many sources who say this is an outdated custom and it’s not required. Even George Bush Sr. has been caught not doing it.
Then there's the popular attack about Barack’s Pastor and wife making questionable remarks. People can complain about things that people other than Barack has said all they want. I think the most important thing to remember is that Barack didn’t say any of the questionable remarks. This video is not judging Hilary by what her husband did in office, so why is it judging the actions of others against Barack? I personally don’t even see anything wrong with the remarks made. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and everyone knows that. Why do republicans have to nit pick at these simple opinions?
Barack's Paster said “Barack knows what it is like to be a black man living in a country that is controled by rich white people.” This statement is actually very true. This country was founded by rich white people, it has been run by rich white people, and when Barack becomes president, it will be ran by rich black AND white people!
The video goes on to spend about two whole minutes out of the mere 13 on other remarks that Barack's pastor made.
I really do try to keep my sources objective. Whenever I see a documentary that may have been put out by someone from a particular political party, I always watch the documentary put out by the counter part. For example, I watched An Inconvenient Truth, by Al Gore (liberal). A very good and well made movie, very accurate and credible as well. I then watched the Great Global Warming Swindle (conservative), which was so POORLY made, and included sources and testimonies that were made up! I also watched Farenheit 911 by Michael Moore (liberal), which contained accurate information. I then watched Farenhype 911 (conservative) which was mind numbingly boring, and spent most of the movie disrespecting my intelligence by first (respectably) showing pictures and clips from 911 that had nothing to do with Moore's documentary. It was only there to get the emotional support of the viewers. Then the video went on to attack Moore personally! It barely made any come back to what Moore had originally said. Ugh...
Anyway, this all relates to this video on Barack. The video is by far the worst one yet. It is full of partial editing and cuts out the whole story, the whole quote, or the whole video. It gives unsuspecting viewers a partial representation of Barack. This is just sad, because I know many mindless republicans will view this and then think Barack is bad.
And to clarify, I watched the biography of Barack. You should too. It's about 45 minutes and is quite objective. The video this post is about is so far off it's not even funny. It's just lame.
I don't expect all republicans or even all mormons to get behind Barack. I do know for a fact that many republicans and mormons are supporting him because McCain is an exact replica of Bush, who has a 20% approval rating, which no one wants. Also because I have heard them say they support him.
But I never expected to see anything like this. I found this on a blog. I have so many issues with this video that I MUST post about it.
This video is a 13 minute attack against Barack Obama which is attempting to illustrate how he may be unfit to run for presidency.
I was first shocked to see that their first attack was at his name. Barack's full name being Barack Hussein Obama, was named directly after his father who was a muslim from Kenya. As the video describes this they show a disturbing picture of his father (hold on to your skirts everyone)... studying at a desk with a book. How terrible huh?
The video makes the connection that all three of his names are muslim, and muslims tend to be terrorists and the US is in a war on terror. First of all, Barack had no choice over his name. Ann Coulter, a screaming republican, calls him B. Hussein Obama. Probably to manipulate it just enough to make him sound more like Osama bin Laden, or to sound more muslim. Ann's response for that remark is "that's his name, B. Hussein Obama". No.... his name is Barack Obama. I don't believe in Jesus Christ, but even I know that it would be disrespectful to go around saying J. Christ. I'm sure Ann wouldn't like that too much, or any other screaming Republican. To make this part of the video look even more appaling and juvenile, they show pictures of muslims with decapitated heads. I just can't explain any further how disrespectful this is.
The video goes on to explain a Cuban flag with a picture of Che Guevara on it hanging in a Houston campaign office. At first even I was saying to myself "what the hell?" But it takes no longer than a second and the intelligence of a magot to find the truth of the matter. Barack's official statement regarding the matter was:
"This is a volunteer office that is not in any way controlled by the Obama campaign. We were disappointed to see this picture because it is both offensive to many Cuban-Americans -- and Americans of all backgrounds -- and because it does not reflect Senator Obama’s views. Barack Obama has been very clear in putting forward a Cuba policy that is based on one principle: freedom for the Cuban people." -- Obama Campaign.
AND
"The office featured in this video is funded by volunteers of the Barack Obama Campaign and is not an official headquarters for his campaign."
I really don't think I need to explain this further.
Barack is also criticized for not wearing a flag lapel pin on his coat. Hmmm, I didn't know that was a requirement for running for president.... oh, right, it's not. This may seem odd at first, but again, do some research people. Barack was quoted saying this regarding the matter.
"Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama says he doesn't wear an American flag lapel pin because it has become a substitute for "true patriotism" since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks... 'I'm going to try to tell the American people what I believe will make this country great, and hopefully that will be a testament to my patriotism.'"
Barack was yet again criticized, this time for the incident of not putting his hand over his heart at a ceremony where the national anthem was sung. I'm not sure as to why he didn't do that. I couldn't find an accurate reason. But I did find many sources who say this is an outdated custom and it’s not required. Even George Bush Sr. has been caught not doing it.
Then there's the popular attack about Barack’s Pastor and wife making questionable remarks. People can complain about things that people other than Barack has said all they want. I think the most important thing to remember is that Barack didn’t say any of the questionable remarks. This video is not judging Hilary by what her husband did in office, so why is it judging the actions of others against Barack? I personally don’t even see anything wrong with the remarks made. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and everyone knows that. Why do republicans have to nit pick at these simple opinions?
Barack's Paster said “Barack knows what it is like to be a black man living in a country that is controled by rich white people.” This statement is actually very true. This country was founded by rich white people, it has been run by rich white people, and when Barack becomes president, it will be ran by rich black AND white people!
The video goes on to spend about two whole minutes out of the mere 13 on other remarks that Barack's pastor made.
I really do try to keep my sources objective. Whenever I see a documentary that may have been put out by someone from a particular political party, I always watch the documentary put out by the counter part. For example, I watched An Inconvenient Truth, by Al Gore (liberal). A very good and well made movie, very accurate and credible as well. I then watched the Great Global Warming Swindle (conservative), which was so POORLY made, and included sources and testimonies that were made up! I also watched Farenheit 911 by Michael Moore (liberal), which contained accurate information. I then watched Farenhype 911 (conservative) which was mind numbingly boring, and spent most of the movie disrespecting my intelligence by first (respectably) showing pictures and clips from 911 that had nothing to do with Moore's documentary. It was only there to get the emotional support of the viewers. Then the video went on to attack Moore personally! It barely made any come back to what Moore had originally said. Ugh...
Anyway, this all relates to this video on Barack. The video is by far the worst one yet. It is full of partial editing and cuts out the whole story, the whole quote, or the whole video. It gives unsuspecting viewers a partial representation of Barack. This is just sad, because I know many mindless republicans will view this and then think Barack is bad.
And to clarify, I watched the biography of Barack. You should too. It's about 45 minutes and is quite objective. The video this post is about is so far off it's not even funny. It's just lame.
Friday, June 20, 2008
Heaven (Posted by AMBERLY)
A man dies and goes to heaven. Saint Peter meets him at the gates and takes him on a tour. They enter a long hall with doors lining either side of it.
Saint Peter opens the first door they come to they see the Hindus reading the Rigveda. The next door they open they see the Buddists reading the The Diamond Sutra. In the next room contains people of various Islamic faiths reading the Qur'an, and the next has Catholics reading the Bible.
Then they pass a door that Peter doesn't open. This rouses the man's curiosity and he asks,
"Who is in that room, sir?"
"Well," Peter replies, "that is the room with the Mormons. Don't go in there; they think they are the only ones in heaven."
Saint Peter opens the first door they come to they see the Hindus reading the Rigveda. The next door they open they see the Buddists reading the The Diamond Sutra. In the next room contains people of various Islamic faiths reading the Qur'an, and the next has Catholics reading the Bible.
Then they pass a door that Peter doesn't open. This rouses the man's curiosity and he asks,
"Who is in that room, sir?"
"Well," Peter replies, "that is the room with the Mormons. Don't go in there; they think they are the only ones in heaven."
Thursday, June 19, 2008
using the 11th article of faith to my advantage, By AMBERLY
"Why do you feel the need to persuade others to leave the Church?"
“We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.”
I guess… unless it means the way they worship includes denouncing Mormonism. Why is it that the Church can have an LDS website on the internet for whoever wants to view it, but I can’t have a website proclaiming my beliefs against Mormonism? Why is it that Mormons can proselyte- even knock on the doors of people’s homes, to persuade them to leave whatever church they are a part of, but I can’t simply have a website where I express my feelings, and perhaps persuade them to believe what I believe?
If one were to leave Catholicism to be Mormon, he would be praised. But if one is to leave Mormonism to join another church or none at all, he is looked down upon as a sinner. The church may claim to have and know the truth, but I claim the same thing. The church does not have a copyright on “truth”. You can’t have a double standard just because you go around saying your church is the only true one. Anyone can say that.
“We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.”
I guess… unless it means the way they worship includes denouncing Mormonism. Why is it that the Church can have an LDS website on the internet for whoever wants to view it, but I can’t have a website proclaiming my beliefs against Mormonism? Why is it that Mormons can proselyte- even knock on the doors of people’s homes, to persuade them to leave whatever church they are a part of, but I can’t simply have a website where I express my feelings, and perhaps persuade them to believe what I believe?
If one were to leave Catholicism to be Mormon, he would be praised. But if one is to leave Mormonism to join another church or none at all, he is looked down upon as a sinner. The church may claim to have and know the truth, but I claim the same thing. The church does not have a copyright on “truth”. You can’t have a double standard just because you go around saying your church is the only true one. Anyone can say that.
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
South Park Quote (Posted by Amberly)
"It proves he DID make it all up, are you blind? It's a matter of logic. If you gonna say things that have been proven wrong, like that the first man and women lived in Missouri and that Native Americans came from Jerusalem, then you better have something to back it up. All you've got are a bunch of stories about some [guy] who read plates no body ever saw out of a hat and then couldn't do it again when the translations where hidden!"
Thursday, June 5, 2008
An educational video (Posted by AMBERLY)
I found this video from a fellow blogger and I just HAVE to put it on mine. It's just too hilarious. I advize that everyone invest about 20 minutes of your life and watch this.
via videosift.com
via videosift.com
Wednesday, June 4, 2008
Yo Soy...(Posted by AMBERLY)
Someone with the profile "Yo Soy" posted some cool comments on the blog. But when I went to publish them, they disappeared along with the approval email I got. It was very strange. So whoever you are "Yo Soy", feel free to post more totally awesome comments. Thanks!
Tuesday, June 3, 2008
Cognitive Dissonance (Posted by AMBERLY)
"Cognitive dissonance is a psychological state that describes the uncomfortable feeling when a person begins to understand that something the person believes to be true is, in fact, not true. Similar to ambivalence, the term cognitive dissonance describes conflicting thoughts or beliefs (cognitions) that occur at the same time, or when engaged in behaviors that conflict with one's beliefs. In academic literature, the term refers to attempts to reduce the discomfort of conflicting thoughts by performing actions that are opposite to one's beliefs.
In simple terms, it can be the filtering of information that conflicts with what one already believes, in an effort to ignore that information and reinforce one's beliefs. In detailed terms, it is the perception of incompatibility between two cognitions, where "cognition" is defined as any element of knowledge, including attitude, emotion, belief, or behavior. The theory of cognitive dissonance states that contradicting cognitions serve as a driving force that compels the mind to acquire or invent new thoughts or beliefs, or to modify existing beliefs, so as to reduce the amount of dissonance (conflict) between cognitions. Experiments have attempted to quantify this hypothetical drive. Some of these have examined how beliefs often change to match behavior when beliefs and behavior are in conflict."
In simple terms, it can be the filtering of information that conflicts with what one already believes, in an effort to ignore that information and reinforce one's beliefs. In detailed terms, it is the perception of incompatibility between two cognitions, where "cognition" is defined as any element of knowledge, including attitude, emotion, belief, or behavior. The theory of cognitive dissonance states that contradicting cognitions serve as a driving force that compels the mind to acquire or invent new thoughts or beliefs, or to modify existing beliefs, so as to reduce the amount of dissonance (conflict) between cognitions. Experiments have attempted to quantify this hypothetical drive. Some of these have examined how beliefs often change to match behavior when beliefs and behavior are in conflict."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
