tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3605441624638211892.post2603686766149189471..comments2008-06-24T17:11:57.140-06:00L-D Sushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00845905845446101759LDSustainablist@gmail.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3605441624638211892.post-18497531864020079122008-06-24T17:11:00.000-06:002008-06-24T17:11:00.000-06:00I am always glad when someone -besides me- likes my posts. I think it takes a certain amount of ego to write a blog. Nitesh, your comment fuels my ego...my spouse will be so happy.Latter-Day Sustainablisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00845905845446101759noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3605441624638211892.post-28675097672416450742008-06-24T16:39:00.000-06:002008-06-24T16:39:00.000-06:00I always like your posts, keep up the great work!Niteshhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17896832311524481664noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3605441624638211892.post-66194476320396822352008-05-23T08:15:00.000-06:002008-05-23T08:15:00.000-06:00We do all have the freedom to choose the wrong things.<BR/><BR/>The handouts we give to Myanmar or Darfur often remind me giving fish instead of fishing lessons. I don't think you can place 100% of the blame on their government's reaction to our gift horses.<BR/><BR/>I have to agree, that having children is not selfish. Ignorant maybe (excepting cases where revelation plays a part), but not selfish.Matthew Pettyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18009215948462800812noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3605441624638211892.post-29385311357137170642008-05-23T08:01:00.000-06:002008-05-23T08:01:00.000-06:00I'm sorry, but I have to have to disagree with some of the commentors here. I am of the school of thought that says that LDS families should multiply as much as they possibly can (dependant on both ability and revelation for themselves and their families). Steven Covey once told me that the nuclear family was a Satanic principle. I'd have to agree. It is not, nor will it ever be a selfish thing to have as many children as you can and raise them in righteousness. We need more good people on the earth, NOT LESS.<BR/>Now as for mismanagement, yes there is mismanagement of a lot of resources. I'm sickened by the decisions of many environmentalists that restrict the exploration of oil and other fuels for their own political ends. As a country, we have given so much of our substance to the poor, but because of corrupt governments that maintain control over their subjects, the supplies never reach the poorest among these countries (see Myanmar, Darfur, etc.) There is "to spare", but it will never stop being mismanaged until we change our hearts through the gospel. Changing (or forcing) public policy that will ultimately make our society less free is not the answer.Philhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17479145169076045094noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3605441624638211892.post-73471839427903229982008-05-06T16:54:00.000-06:002008-05-06T16:54:00.000-06:00Love your blog! I think you would enjoy, ldsartshow.com has the most incredible LDS site I have ever seen! If you love art and music, enjoy!<BR/>Email me if you think it is cool, maybe I just don’t get out much.Niteshhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17896832311524481664noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3605441624638211892.post-23482032966588856372008-04-30T08:57:00.000-06:002008-04-30T08:57:00.000-06:00Yes, I am intrigued by that, too.<BR/><BR/>Many members still don't understand that they have an important effect on the environment by the example of their lives...<BR/><BR/>My main concern in this is the number of children LDS members seem to have. Even if the resources of this Earth are managed in accordance with the Spirit, that birth rate is not sustainable.<BR/><BR/>In other words, "multiply" should NOT be interpreted as "multiply as much as possible."Matthew Pettyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18009215948462800812noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3605441624638211892.post-57865831380365652172008-04-30T08:15:00.000-06:002008-04-30T08:15:00.000-06:00Matthew-<BR/><BR/>Thanks for sharing. You have highlighted a big assumption in my math.<BR/><BR/>It all comes down to the meaning of "multiply and replenish." My post was based on the common (at least it is common in my corner of the world) interpretation that “multiply” means have children thereby increasing population. Although I my post was based on this interpetation, I confess that I am still pondering my position on the issue. I plan to write a post exploring this in the near future. <BR/><BR/>Here are a couple of links that discuss <A HREF="http://www.timesandseasons.org/?p=4240" REL="nofollow">multiply</A> and <A HREF="http://www.timesandseasons.org/?p=4241#more-4241" REL="nofollow">replenish</A> in an LDS context. I am intrigued by the idea that “replenish” applies to the world (environment) in general, not just to population.Latter-Day Sustainablisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00845905845446101759noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3605441624638211892.post-58992365994228905472008-04-30T06:22:00.000-06:002008-04-30T06:22:00.000-06:00I think you've made an interpretive mistake here.<BR/><BR/>To me, "multiply and replenish" means that we should make sure to procreate in order to replenish the deaths of the elderly.<BR/><BR/>The zero-population-growth people would agree that replenishing deaths is necessary and a "good thing".<BR/><BR/>Moderation is important for all things, even the number of children we create and the amount of resources we use.Matthew Pettyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18009215948462800812noreply@blogger.com