Let's examine it this way: Suppose you have a youth group (anywhere from 8 on up to 18) who really can do more in a weekend of harvesting apricots than they could donate from their non-existent or low-paying jobs (for which they may or may not be able to pick up extra shifts at 6AM when it's cool enough in peach-territory for harvesting). Now let's say that you have to have some sort of adult supervision (again, at 6AM on a Saturday when adult supervisors are unlikely to have extra shifts to work at the Wal-Mart, the accounting firm, or wherever).
Now let's suppose a few of these people experience service first-hand and realize that they could be doing so much more, and this inspires them to do as you suggest, and they begin working one extra hour per week and donating that to the humanitarian efforts. Or let's say they decide to give up their Satellite TV service and donate that amount to charity.
Furthermore, let's suppose that this increase in awareness of the need (and value) of personal service inspires more and more people to serve and donate. If you look at it in the light of these reasonable ideas, then it might not be so inefficient after all.
I once heard a saying that says that the world works from the outside in, but the Lord works from the inside out. The meaning being that if you can get someone to change their outlook, attitudes, and desires, then you are doing much more good than if you just try to change the product that they are putting out. I think this would apply in this case.
You simply can't fault the Mormons for the good they are doing in the world. It's like taking Schindler to task for not doing more. It's fine for people on the inside to be self-critical, but when you're on the outside doing less, or on the receiving end of it, you haven't much room to talk. As someone else said, if you are on the outside looking in, you can be hostile, but not critical. That last saying is useful, but I'm not sure how good it is.
You proceed from the assumption that religious knowledge is inferior to secular knowledge, or that 'the professions of man' give more correct information than revelation.
If you assume that God knows everything, and that He does not lie (Boyd K. Packer certainly proceeds from this assumption), then Packer's statement is certainly good advice.
Also, Packer never told people to ignore what was said in the world. He never said the professors ought to bury their heads in the sand. There is no regulation against 'looking around.'
We only have your word on this, but from what I know, gays are not allowed at BYU. If he applied to BYU, he must have somehow lied about this, right? So he must have attended BYU under false pretenses. Why should they give him anything?
I think that not even letting him transfer credits is a little much, but then I only have your side of the story, and you sound biased.
But seriously, I agree. Why not remove some self-esteem lesson and put some first-aid in there? I wonder if the school would have to accept some liability for that.... In any case, as I think about it I do remember being taught first aid, including CPR, in my 9th grade health class.
I would like to see this info you have on other countries' 12-year-olds' first-aid skills. It sounds fascinating. As a teacher who has taught 3-12 grades and as a Scoutmaster, I also have noticed that schools have nothing at all like the first-aid training that is given to Boy Scouts.
Makes me wonder what part of the core curriculum should be dropped to accommodate it, or how many new days should be added to the school year for this, or how many minutes should be added to the school day for first-aid training.
What you need to do is get the other parents (I can only assume you have children in the school system, as I can't imagine what else could inspire you to such disgust if you had no direct stake in it) and lobby your local school board. Even better, join the PTA and volunteer your services to teach a first aid class at your child's school. If you aren't a parent, you could volunteer with your local Boy Scout troop as a First-Aid merit badge counselor or something.
Or you could just rant anonymously on the Internet.
It's like we're having separate conversations. Of course these are children. Boys will be boys. That's the way it will always be, and I'm not advocating ruining anyone's life. I'm not saying they should get jail time. I'm just saying that if they choose to give up their scholarship, they should be allowed to give it up. No one is being cut off at the knees here.
In a way, when we let children reap what they sow, we are showing them responsibility. Some children, believe it or not, engage in deviant behavior just so they can witness the power they have over their surroundings. One time, it became clear to me that a child was purposefully misbehaving because he wanted to feel the love of his teacher's discipline. He got none at home.
So which child should get the scholarship: the one that earned it, or the one that didn't?
It's been my experience, and the experience of every child behavioral expert I've ever met, that giving children consequences (natural consequences) is the best way for them to learn good behavior. They must learn that they reap what they sow.
There are many, many cases where schools enforce a zero-tolerance policy to the point of absurdity. This is not one of them.
Scholarships are given based on specific criteria. Citizenship grade is usually one of those. These students either were too dumb to find out what the honor code was, or they knowingly violated the honor code. How can a scholarship be awarded to someone who has not earned it? You point out the gross unfairness of people with money vs. people without, but you would design a system that purposefully gives scholarships to children who don't deserve them because they are dumb (they can't read the honor code) or because they haven't kept the honor code (they knowingly broke it). In other words, these children gave up their scholarships, yet it sounds like you want them to keep the scholarships anyway.
Now somewhere out there we ought to be able to find a student who has kept the honor code and has good grades. In fact, in the highly competitive world of scholarships, there's probably some kid out there who lost by a hair to the dink who posted all the nasty stuff on the Internet.
Also, the very idea that you can not grow up to be a useful citizen without a scholarship, even after losing your scholarship, is completely without merit. I lost mine, and I'm a mature adult! In fact, the world is filled with adults who are immature, partly because they are taking stuff they have not earned.
They are teaching the children that their actions have consequences. I don't understand how teaching them the power of their actions could mess up a poor child's future. The idea that I have some measure of control over my destiny, for good or ill, has been one of the best things I've ever learned.
Not necessarily. I am merely assuming the GPP knew what he was talking about. If I misunderstood him, or read too much into what he said, then I apologize.
Besides, even if it is only against school rules, that is enough to get it on their citizenship grade, be grounds for expulsion, etc.
The US has a very unhealthy attitude towards drinking - how can someone be trusted to vote, but not allowed to drink?
Mom, Dad, I've been watching the debates and reading the questionnaires and following the issues, and I think I'm going with Sam Adams over Heineken. See, the objectification of women in the Heineken commercials is something I want to avoid, and Sam Adams is made here in America. Plus I'm not entirely comfortable with the way they get their hops from Germany, because I don't know if there is union labor involved with German hops production. So this weekend when I get loaded and knock up my girlfriend then plaster a poor family walking across the street, I'm going to be loaded with Sam Adams.
You read much into his statement. He said only that he believed some lost scholarships over it. The school is duty-bound to report illegal activity on their citizenship grade. They also must report the citizenship grade to universities. Universities often look at stuff like that while awarding scholarships.
If these kids can learn while still teenagers that their actions have consequences, then a scholarship was much more valuable to them as a punishment.
What I'm trying to say is that this punishment probably fit the crime so well that it wasn't a punishment at all, but a natural consequence of stupid, illegal behavior. Some people never learn this. Some people get nice scholarships and still never learn this lesson.
**Note that I am not saying the school did or didn't take away the scholarship, just that I don't think they have that power. The GP definitely didn't say the school took them away, only that they were lost.
This reminds me of that book The Giver by Lois Lowry.
Jonas asks his father, "Do you love me?"
His father laughs at him and gives him a lecture on precision of language, and how Jonas probably meant "Do you care for me?" or something similar.
I wrote off Kucinich the very first time I heard him speak on Democracy Now!
I thought, "Oh my goodness, this dude is nuts!" That's the first time I ever heard of Kucinich. And pretty much the only time I've heard from him since then, as well.
Slashdot Mirror
Now let's suppose a few of these people experience service first-hand and realize that they could be doing so much more, and this inspires them to do as you suggest, and they begin working one extra hour per week and donating that to the humanitarian efforts. Or let's say they decide to give up their Satellite TV service and donate that amount to charity.
Furthermore, let's suppose that this increase in awareness of the need (and value) of personal service inspires more and more people to serve and donate. If you look at it in the light of these reasonable ideas, then it might not be so inefficient after all.
I once heard a saying that says that the world works from the outside in, but the Lord works from the inside out. The meaning being that if you can get someone to change their outlook, attitudes, and desires, then you are doing much more good than if you just try to change the product that they are putting out. I think this would apply in this case.
You simply can't fault the Mormons for the good they are doing in the world. It's like taking Schindler to task for not doing more. It's fine for people on the inside to be self-critical, but when you're on the outside doing less, or on the receiving end of it, you haven't much room to talk. As someone else said, if you are on the outside looking in, you can be hostile, but not critical. That last saying is useful, but I'm not sure how good it is.
My father and at least one of his brothers moved from El Paso to Las Cruces riding on a mattress tied to the top of the car. He said it was fun!
If you assume that God knows everything, and that He does not lie (Boyd K. Packer certainly proceeds from this assumption), then Packer's statement is certainly good advice.
Also, Packer never told people to ignore what was said in the world. He never said the professors ought to bury their heads in the sand. There is no regulation against 'looking around.'
I think that not even letting him transfer credits is a little much, but then I only have your side of the story, and you sound biased.
That's too funny. Whatever.
But seriously, I agree. Why not remove some self-esteem lesson and put some first-aid in there? I wonder if the school would have to accept some liability for that.... In any case, as I think about it I do remember being taught first aid, including CPR, in my 9th grade health class.
Makes me wonder what part of the core curriculum should be dropped to accommodate it, or how many new days should be added to the school year for this, or how many minutes should be added to the school day for first-aid training.
What you need to do is get the other parents (I can only assume you have children in the school system, as I can't imagine what else could inspire you to such disgust if you had no direct stake in it) and lobby your local school board. Even better, join the PTA and volunteer your services to teach a first aid class at your child's school. If you aren't a parent, you could volunteer with your local Boy Scout troop as a First-Aid merit badge counselor or something.
Or you could just rant anonymously on the Internet.
For some religious people, meeting God IS the worst-case scenario.
If you are correct, then what's going to happen is that people will stop doing business with Wal-Mart and they'll crash.
In a way, when we let children reap what they sow, we are showing them responsibility. Some children, believe it or not, engage in deviant behavior just so they can witness the power they have over their surroundings. One time, it became clear to me that a child was purposefully misbehaving because he wanted to feel the love of his teacher's discipline. He got none at home.
So which child should get the scholarship: the one that earned it, or the one that didn't? It's been my experience, and the experience of every child behavioral expert I've ever met, that giving children consequences (natural consequences) is the best way for them to learn good behavior. They must learn that they reap what they sow.
Scholarships are given based on specific criteria. Citizenship grade is usually one of those. These students either were too dumb to find out what the honor code was, or they knowingly violated the honor code. How can a scholarship be awarded to someone who has not earned it? You point out the gross unfairness of people with money vs. people without, but you would design a system that purposefully gives scholarships to children who don't deserve them because they are dumb (they can't read the honor code) or because they haven't kept the honor code (they knowingly broke it). In other words, these children gave up their scholarships, yet it sounds like you want them to keep the scholarships anyway.
Now somewhere out there we ought to be able to find a student who has kept the honor code and has good grades. In fact, in the highly competitive world of scholarships, there's probably some kid out there who lost by a hair to the dink who posted all the nasty stuff on the Internet.
Also, the very idea that you can not grow up to be a useful citizen without a scholarship, even after losing your scholarship, is completely without merit. I lost mine, and I'm a mature adult! In fact, the world is filled with adults who are immature, partly because they are taking stuff they have not earned.
They are teaching the children that their actions have consequences. I don't understand how teaching them the power of their actions could mess up a poor child's future. The idea that I have some measure of control over my destiny, for good or ill, has been one of the best things I've ever learned.
Besides, even if it is only against school rules, that is enough to get it on their citizenship grade, be grounds for expulsion, etc.
Oh, and another thing: you are right that the kid would never be suspended for participating in a religious rite.
If these kids can learn while still teenagers that their actions have consequences, then a scholarship was much more valuable to them as a punishment.
What I'm trying to say is that this punishment probably fit the crime so well that it wasn't a punishment at all, but a natural consequence of stupid, illegal behavior. Some people never learn this. Some people get nice scholarships and still never learn this lesson.
**Note that I am not saying the school did or didn't take away the scholarship, just that I don't think they have that power. The GP definitely didn't say the school took them away, only that they were lost.
That was a good post. Better than I deserved. That's what I get for being a smarty-pants.
Jonas asks his father, "Do you love me?"
His father laughs at him and gives him a lecture on precision of language, and how Jonas probably meant "Do you care for me?" or something similar.
"Call Mike Maloney, Bail Bonds. 555-FREE"
News to me.
I thought, "Oh my goodness, this dude is nuts!" That's the first time I ever heard of Kucinich. And pretty much the only time I've heard from him since then, as well.
Our support from Dell is awesome! We have our own guy and Dell reimburses us for his time.
I find it extremely easy to believe this kid got busted for dinking around and made up this story, even to the faking of a document.
Check this link out. Someone else in this thread pointed it out, but hasn't as yet been modded.
I thought your sig was awesome, especially when applied to your post.