Does the LDS Culture Promote Obesity?

[_Some Schmo]

I recognize that there are multiple ways in which Church leaders may not be comparable to parent and school teachers. After all, the sheer number of members of the Church disallow Church leaders, particlularly at the GA level, from having the kind of personal interactions as do parents with their children and teachers with their students. So there is a clear quantitative and qualitative difference there. And, while the Church leaders may be specialized in some areas, I do not view them as specialist in all the areas that I mentioned (just as I would not expect parents to be specialist in teaching public education or medicine, etc.), nor would I advocate that they be appealed to in all cases over specialist in certain areas--though I wouldn't think it reasonable to think they shouldn't be appealed to at all outside their area of specialization (just as I wouldn't think it reasonable to suggest that parents not be appealed to in any way regarding public education or medical issues, etc.). Nothing I said could reasonably be interpreted as suggesting otherwise.

Rather, I was speaking in terms of general principles (specifically, personal responsibility as it relates to growth and developmet of all kinds--including spiritual) in the context of the relationship between Church leaders and Church members. I don't see that as a "stretch", though certainly what I said may be mistakenly "stretched" way out of proportion, as the case may be. ;-)

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

The point, which you are either willfully or unable to avoid ignoring, is that when it comes to personal responsibility, adults should have it without needing to be told what to do (and as a side bar, kids should learn it from the important role models in their life like their parents and teachers). Adults don't need church leaders who purport to have the word of god, expect complete obedience, and claim that adults should just listen to them because the thinking has been done. There's a big difference between that and simply taking or leaving some leader's advice based on an individual's own council.

That was the idea behind my original comment. Kids do need their parents and teachers. Adults (or kids, for that matter) don't need church leaders.

I think part of the problem in your thinking is the fact that it appears you somehow distinguish between the "spiritual" and the "mental." The fact is that they're one and the same... Spirituality is an function of the brain and simply imagined.

[_RebelYell]

I had to reply to the topic while I eat my king size Hersey bar dropped off yesterday (Mother's Day) by my ever faithful hometeachers (we haven't been in over 1 year and they still come around) along with some cute cookie/gumdrop-not spell checked-cult poem.... who said the church promotes obesity?

[_Mister Scratch]

My .02: I would not say that LDS culture "promotes" obesity, per se, however I would say that it definitely contributes to an environment where obesity can be more prevalent. A simple examination of typical Utah Mormon cuisine as evidenced in the average ward potluck reveals a rather horrifying penchant for high-calorie, poor nutrient diet. Further, I think that there is a tendency among lower-class LDS families and/or families with many children to rely on frozen, ready-made, or easy-to-prepare kinds of foods (carry-overs from the 1950s, perhaps) which tend not to be very healthy. (E.g., Jello.) Finally, Church ball notwithstanding, the many hours which are eaten up (pun intended) by Church duties tends to detract from the time one can devote to exercise.

[_wenglund]

The point, which you are either willfully or unable to avoid ignoring, is that when it comes to personal responsibility, adults should have it without needing to be told what to do (and as a side bar, kids should learn it from the important role models in their life like their parents and teachers). Adults don't need church leaders who purport to have the word of god, expect complete obedience, and claim that adults should just listen to them because the thinking has been done. There's a big difference between that and simply taking or leaving some leader's advice based on an individual's own council.

That was the idea behind my original comment. Kids do need their parents and teachers. Adults (or kids, for that matter) don't need church leaders.

I think part of the problem in your thinking is the fact that it appears you somehow distinguish between the "spiritual" and the "mental." The fact is that they're one and the same... Spirituality is an function of the brain and simply imagined.

It is not that I have ignored your point (willful or otherwise), but rather that I don't fully agree with it--regardless of how dogmatically, intollerantly, or emphatically you may state it.

I could point out reasonable examples of where adults have needed to be told what to do even in secular situations (ever hear of speed limits, controlled substances, marriage and divorce laws, etc.?), let alone on religious matters, though I don't know that it would make any difference to you. So, why bother?

To each their own.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_Some Schmo]

It is not that I have ignored your point (willful or otherwise), but rather that I don't fully agree with it--regardless of how dogmatically, intollerantly, or emphatically you may state it.

LOL - oh, but you have ignored it, and still are. At least, you haven't actually addressed it yet. I get the feeling you think you can escape addressing it though this strange practice of misdirection you keep trying, but it's not working (on me, anyway).

I could point out reasonable examples of where adults have needed to be told what to do even in secular situations (ever hear of speed limits, controlled substances, marriage and divorce laws, etc.?), let alone on religious matters, though I don't know that it would make any difference to you. So, why bother?

See, you actually are missing the point. Adults shouldn't have to be told what to do on matters like speed limits, controlled substances, marriage and divorce, etc. Adults that need to be told what to do are irresponsible (again, drawing a distinction between seeking advice, eg. divorce laws, and being told what to do). The very fact that things like, for instance, gambling, drugs, and prostitution are litigated at all is part of what leads to an infantile culture where people, who otherwise should be making choices like this for themselves are looking to the gov't to be told what to do. It's utterly ridiculous. And religion is yet another contributing factor in the formation of generally irresponsible adults. I've made that observation in different contexts numerous times before.

Thank you for inadvertantly helping to reinforce my point.

[_wenglund]

It is not that I have ignored your point (willful or otherwise), but rather that I don't fully agree with it--regardless of how dogmatically, intollerantly, or emphatically you may state it.

LOL - oh, but you have ignored it, and still are. At least, you haven't actually addressed it yet. I get the feeling you think you can escape addressing it though this strange practice of misdirection you keep trying, but it's not working (on me, anyway).

I could point out reasonable examples of where adults have needed to be told what to do even in secular situations (ever hear of speed limits, controlled substances, marriage and divorce laws, etc.?), let alone on religious matters, though I don't know that it would make any difference to you. So, why bother?

See, you actually are missing the point. Adults shouldn't have to be told what to do on matters like speed limits, controlled substances, marriage and divorce, etc. Adults that need to be told what to do are irresponsible (again, drawing a distinction between seeking advice, eg. divorce laws, and being told what to do). The very fact that things like, for instance, gambling, drugs, and prostitution are litigated at all is part of what leads to an infantile culture where people, who otherwise should be making choices like this for themselves are looking to the gov't to be told what to do. It's utterly ridiculous. And religion is yet another contributing factor in the formation of generally irresponsible adults. I've made that observation in different contexts numerous times before.

Thank you for inadvertantly helping to reinforce my point.

I am fine with you assuming that I both missed and reinforced your point (if that is even possible0--not that you may be open to being convinced otherwise, or even open to correctly understanding what I have said sufficiently to reasonably know one way or the other.

But, just out of curiousity. Are you advocating anarchy?

And, however you answer that question, by your advocating whatever, aren't you inadvertantly telling adults what to do?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_Mercury]

Leave it to Wade to go from "No im not....waa...waaa...your being mean which means I can ignore you now"

to

"Your advocating mass chaos through Anarchy...Shame Shame"

[_Some Schmo]

Thank you for inadvertantly helping to reinforce my point.

I am fine with you assuming that I both missed and reinforced your point (if that is even possible0--not that you may be open to being convinced otherwise, or even open to correctly understanding what I have said sufficiently to reasonably know one way or the other.

But, just out of curiousity. Are you advocating anarchy?

And, however you answer that question, by your advocating whatever, aren't you inadvertantly telling adults what to do?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Of course it's possible to both miss and reinforce my point. I'm not saying you meant to, just that you did.

And I understood what you were saying (the words aren't that difficult) but you were avoiding the real issue, likely in order to maintain a belief in the value of church leaders (best guess).

Now I'll answer your question with another: how is claiming that adults should be responsible for themselves even remotely related to anarchy? And how is claiming that adults should be responsible for themselves telling them what to do?

I'm assuming you're an active member of the church. If not, it sure seems like you've suffered its indoctrination.

[Guest]

Deleted

[_wenglund]

Thank you for inadvertantly helping to reinforce my point.

I am fine with you assuming that I both missed and reinforced your point (if that is even possible0--not that you may be open to being convinced otherwise, or even open to correctly understanding what I have said sufficiently to reasonably know one way or the other.

But, just out of curiousity. Are you advocating anarchy?

And, however you answer that question, by your advocating whatever, aren't you inadvertantly telling adults what to do?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Of course it's possible to both miss and reinforce my point. I'm not saying you meant to, just that you did.

And I understood what you were saying (the words aren't that difficult) but you were avoiding the real issue, likely in order to maintain a belief in the value of church leaders (best guess).

With all due respect, each of your subsequent comments make it evident to me that your understanding is as incorrect as your guess. But, it is not worth arguing over.

Now I'll answer your question with another: how is claiming that adults should be responsible for themselves even remotely related to anarchy?

I am puzzled that you would ask since you previously said: "Adults shouldn't have to be told what to do on matters like speed limits, controlled substances, marriage and divorce, etc. Adults that need to be told what to do are irresponsible (again, drawing a distinction between seeking advice, eg. divorce laws, and being told what to do). The very fact that things like, for instance, gambling, drugs, and prostitution are litigated at all is part of what leads to an infantile culture where people, who otherwise should be making choices like this for themselves are looking to the gov't to be told what to do."

Sounds to me like you are suggesting that governments and laws are due to "infantile culture", and mature adult don't need a government to tell them what to do. This suggest to me that you prefer our maturing as a culture to the point where govenrments and laws are no longer needed, and adults are no longer told what to do by governments and laws. To me, that smacks a bit of anachism, but I thought that rather than jump to any hard-and-fast conclusion, I would ask so as to make sure one way or the other. So, are you advocating anarchy or not?

And how is claiming that adults should be responsible for themselves telling them what to do?

If you aren't telling adults what they "should" do, then who are you telling what to do?

I'm assuming you're an active member of the church. If not, it sure seems like you've suffered its indoctrination.

Your assumtion is correct, but there is some question whether your pejorative stereotyping applies.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-