Bunny Trails

[temporal1]

http://forum.mennonet.com/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=3631

I don’t think that Biden was “promoting” divorce by saying that things get better after divorce — I don’t know what it means to “promote” divorce. I saw it as a statement of hope.

My divorce was one of the worst things I’ve gone through. I didn’t intend to get divorced when I married my ex, but divorce became an option when staying married to her was worse.

One of the hopeful things people told me as I was going through this is that things will get better afterwards. And they did get better...for all the ways divorce complicated my life, my life is better now than it was when I was married to my ex.

I wish there wasn’t so much judgement and condemnation of people who have had to go through this. I know I’m not the only one here.

i’m surprised you would not recognize the power/influence the U.S. White House has on culture.
if Jill Biden said she preferred avocado toast for lunch, McDonald’s would add it to their menu.
her nod to Martinis was pretty awful, too. considering her position.

i did not know you were divorced. i’m sincerely sorry.
divorce “is worse than death.” one loved pastor once shared with me.
i’m not aware of judgment+condemnation. more empathy and grief. shared pain. remorse that divorce has been so normalized huge numbers of people no longer have an inkling of how serious it is. children suffer.

so much pain, yet many absolutely clueless about “why.”
for a significant period, entertainment media treated divorce as desirable.

Just because it feels better to have "put asunder" that which God had joined together doesn't make it right.
I can understand the wish to not have to suffer the stigma associated with wrongdoing, but we shouldn't suggest that divorce is OK just to make people feel good. I think this is a poor place to ask people to approve of that which Jesus forbids.

yes. most are in need of Truth. and, truth. divorce hurts. there are predictable reasons why.

[temporal1]

Page 1 (Good things Biden .. )

We had an exact same thread to say things we liked about the Trump Presidency. Here is what that OP said it the Trump thread:

I’ve heard many people say specific things they don’t like, such as dishonesty, morals, etc.
I also hear people allude that there are things they like.
What are some of the specific things you likde about Trump, or his policies, or his administration etc.? Especially things that you think may be unique to this administration vs other Republicans.

Let’s use this thread to do the same with Biden. Remember, only good things you appreciate, no listing his faults, sins, crimes, or poor decisions etc.

If it’s like the other thread, then half the posts will be criticism of the current President.

Likely, more than half, if including posts moved to Bunny Trails by mods.
i don’t expect the same disregard of OP in this thread. i doubt anyone does.

[Outsider]

This is the best way to get your medical:

"The patients of doctors William Crouch and Lee Gross know exactly what services will cost before they receive them—a radical concept only in health care. They don't have to deal with benefit packages, coverage denials, hidden costs, in network vs. out of network, or any surprises whatsoever. Instead, their patients buy the medical equivalent of a Netflix subscription.

At $75 per month for adults, "We make it cheaper than a cell phone," says Dr. Gross. "If you can afford a cell phone, you can afford the most basic aspect of health care delivery in the United States.""


https://reason.com/video/2021/03/03/the ... -medicine/

"Gross adds that "for what Medicare pays for a single technology visit, I provide two to three months of unlimited technology visits, unlimited office visits, unlimited home visits, unlimited email visits. And so now the model is, again, pandemic tested. It's proven that it's actually a superior model because we have the built-in flexibility to do what we need at the time we need it.""

[temporal1]

This is the best way to get your medical:

"The patients of doctors William Crouch and Lee Gross know exactly what services will cost before they receive them—a radical concept only in health care. They don't have to deal with benefit packages, coverage denials, hidden costs, in network vs. out of network, or any surprises whatsoever. Instead, their patients buy the medical equivalent of a Netflix subscription.

At $75 per month for adults, "We make it cheaper than a cell phone," says Dr. Gross. "If you can afford a cell phone, you can afford the most basic aspect of health care delivery in the United States.""


https://reason.com/video/2021/03/03/the ... -medicine/

"Gross adds that "for what Medicare pays for a single technology visit, I provide two to three months of unlimited technology visits, unlimited office visits, unlimited home visits, unlimited email visits. And so now the model is, again, pandemic tested. It's proven that it's actually a superior model because we have the built-in flexibility to do what we need at the time we need it.""

interesting.
a few years ago, one doctor mentioned “Concierge medicine,” or “Boutique doctors.” he moved to Texas.
i know little. i expected to hear more about these ideas than i have. a general reference:

2013 / “Is a 'Boutique' Doctor for You?”
https://www.aarp.org/health/healthy-liv ... ctors.html

(i’m not an AARP or AMAC member.)

[Outsider]

2013 / “Is a 'Boutique' Doctor for You?”
https://www.aarp.org/health/healthy-liv ... ctors.html

(i’m not an AARP or AMAC member.)

I'm not either (a member of either ).

And it's true that such practices are limited at the moment, but in the late 1920's & early 1930's there were practices that encompassed whole hospitals and included ranks of specialists among them- for the same kind of pricing as the small "boutique" practices.

It would be such a blessing on so many (including the indigent!) if such was the common practice today- rather than the costly and red-tape filled mess that passes for medical payment practices.

[temporal1]

2013 / “Is a 'Boutique' Doctor for You?”
https://www.aarp.org/health/healthy-liv ... ctors.html

(i’m not an AARP or AMAC member.)

I'm not either (a member of either ).

And it's true that such practices are limited at the moment, but in the late 1920's & early 1930's there were practices that encompassed whole hospitals and included ranks of specialists among them- for the same kind of pricing as the small "boutique" practices.

It would be such a blessing on so many (including the indigent!) if such was the common practice today- rather than the costly and red-tape filled mess that passes for medical payment practices.

i’ll be sharing these links with my young family. young people need to know.
it was a young Asian doctor who mentioned this to me. i liked him. sorry he moved, don’t blame him.

[temporal1]

These last two paragraphs align well with many CM views i’ve read on this forum.
They give simple and direct, practical guidance on how all individuals may “live” this view in response to Jesus Christ.
These words speak to fornication, adultery, and abstinence from all sin, specifically carnal sin.

.. This consideration not only concerns same-sex couples, but also unions that involve the sexual activity outside of matrimony. Another reason for the negative response is the risk that the blessing of same-sex unions may be mistakenly associated with that of the Sacrament of Matrimony.

The CDF concludes by noting that the Response to the dubium does not preclude “the blessings given to individual persons with homosexual inclinations, who manifest the will to live in fidelity to the revealed plans of God”, while it declares impermissible “any form of blessing that tends to acknowledge their unions as such”.

The words, “Go, and sin no more,” can be gut-wrenchingly difficult, but they are transformative.

I like that.
I do suspect some CM churches might approach this a little differently than the official Catholic response,

but it's best to let them speak for themselves.

What, exactly, suggests CMs are not wanted to “speak for themselves” in this topic or forum?
What suggests CMs would use exact language with the Vatican?

This thread, Bunny Trails, is a good place for you to pursue those questions.

[temporal1]

viewtopic.php?f=24&t=3687&p=118436#p118436

Soloist:

boot:
I like that.
I do suspect some CM churches might approach this a little differently than the official Catholic response, but it's best to let them speak for themselves.

I suspect the CM would hardly even comment on it.
They would handle it on a local individual level but the CM's are sadly unprepared to help these people on a broad survey but there are pockets were there would be people willing to help walk through the difficulty.

The transgender would find it even harder to get help as it is beyond rare among the plain people.

Homosexuality has occurred in many CM churches resulting in excommunication and sometimes results in positive results but I've never met any positive outcomes personally.

Its easy to say something is sin. Its far harder to deal with wrong thought patterns and individualism.

The Conservative Mennonites will never deal with same sex unions.
The church will walk to the world and lose the values it has before that would ever happen.

This is a easily identifiable sign of apostasy that churches even have this discussion to change what God ordained from the beginning.

On this forum, CM Josh often refers to the sins of fornication and adultery - esp in response to topics of abortion, and homosexuality. He doesn’t speak for all CMs. (who does?) i agree with his points on this, both in response to abortion and homosexuality.

The CC is “fragmented” over these divisive topics, no denom is unscathed. Sorry to say.

CMs are not the “noisiest” members on this forum.
But (i think) CM input is the #1 interest that draws readers/members.
Some members are drawn to CM input for the central purpose of dismissing it! Most have respectful interest.

Soloist:
.. This is a easily identifiable sign of apostasy that churches even have this discussion to change what God ordained from the beginning.

“1 good thing” -
about this awful period in Christian life is:
Christians have been forced to think/reflect on “what scriptures say” and “what does this mean to me/us?”

often, when we take things for granted, we forget why. then, confusion.
hard topics force decision making. “who/what will i follow?” “how far?” “where is my heart?”

i’m not suggesting i disagree with your observation.

decisions must be made. Jesus asks His to decide to choose Him. when the decision is yes, peace follows.

the mainstream does not lead to peace. not a goal. peace is not profitable for them.

[Bootstrap]

I do suspect some CM churches might approach this a little differently than the official Catholic response,

but it's best to let them speak for themselves.

What, exactly, suggests CMs are not wanted to “speak for themselves” in this topic or forum?
What suggests CMs would use exact language with the Vatican?

This thread, Bunny Trails, is a good place for you to pursue those questions.

You offered an opinion about what CMs would think. I speculated that they might see it differently, but also wanted to be clear that neither Catholics nor non-plain Mennonites can speak for CMs.

We'll see how many CMs choose to respond in the thread.

[temporal1]

You offered an opinion about what CMs would think.

not really. not my opinion. not speculation.
just describing some observations of some CM posts i’ve read over years on this forum.

in my response to Soloist, i referred to CM Josh as an example. he’s an unusual CM on forum, in a few ways-as he sometimes explains; his high post count is unusual for CM forum members. Josh may correct me, he often does.

this really is a b.t.

We'll see how many CMs choose to respond in the thread.

hmm.
i never expect response from any member. esp not CMs.
i’m not sure what you’re intending to suggest here. it does not appear to be anything worthwhile.

and nothing to do with the original OP: Current Events: Vatican