Not going to reply to or QT this because it's utterly revolting and I don't want to amplify it, but this does need a response, especially because I've seen a disturbing number of #LDS accounts who I normally respect amplifying it as if it's doctrinally sound. 1/🧵
2/ Let me start by saying that any time a marriage ends in divorce, it’s a tragedy. A marriage is a very sacred and serious commitment, and the Lord views the breakdown of marriages as one of the great evils of our day. But divorce is sometimes very necessary.
3/ My mother served her mission in Chile, a nation which, at the time, still did not have a legal mechanism for divorce (divorce was finally legalized in 2004). In one of her areas, she taught a huge family--mother, father, and eleven kids, most of whom still lived at home.
4/ This good family was receptive to the gospel and wanted to be baptized, but couldn’t initially because the mother and father, despite having lived together for over three decades and having eleven kids together, were not married. Why? Because as a teenager, this dear sister
5/ ended up roped into a marriage to an older man who was cruelly abusive. She eventually (bravely) took matters into her own hands and ran away, and she soon met a good man and started a family with him.
6/ However, they could not marry because her marriage to her first husband was legally insoluble. This denied their family many legal benefits and caused an array of problems for them.
7/ (Postscript: despite the parents remaining legally unmarried, the family was eventually able to obtain First Presidency permission to be baptized and sealed in the temple due to these extenuating circumstances.)
8/ In a similar vein, I have a dear friend whose close family member recently escaped from an abusive marriage. She is now, thankfully, divorced and has full custody of her son. For her, divorce was not a luxury--it was a necessity to protect her safety and that of her child.
9/ I know another individual who, after more than two decades of marriage to a severe pornography addict, finally obtained a divorce a few years ago. She tried desperately to “make it work for the kids”,
10/ but ultimately, all his continued pornography abuse did was cripple their relationship and make them less effective parents. A divorce was necessary for the good of her kids and her own well-being.
11/ This brings me to the crux of the incredibly stupid tweet screenshotted at the start of this thread. This person is arguing that every couple should be required to stay together for the benefit of their children. I shouldn’t have to say this, but that’s insane.
12/ There are numerous conceivable situations (I’ve just mentioned three) where a divorce is infinitely safer, healthier, and more likely to produce positive outcomes for children than the maintenance of an abusive or unhealthy marriage.
13/ Now, with that said, in the absence of physical or severe emotional abuse, the ideal is for spouses to remain together and work through their issues. It is objectively better for children to be raised by two competent parents than by one--
14/ every reliable measure indicates that two-parent households generally produce the best outcomes for children. However, that’s obviously not the case when one of the spouses is unrepentantly abusive or refuses to resolve serious transgressions.
15/ In that case, child-raising outcomes can only be worse if the marriage is maintained.
In a perfect world, there would be no abuse, no infidelity, no addiction. In a perfect world, spouses would be able to resolve any issue between them amicably and make their marriages work
16/ for the benefit of their children. But this isn’t a perfect world.
There are people who, quite frankly, need to get away from a spouse for their own safety and that of their children. Marriage does not magically make a bad person good.
17/17 For that reason, divorce must remain an option. A last resort, yes, but an option. It gives vulnerable people the power to get away from unsafe situations and protect themselves and those they love.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
We forget about this incident today, but President Truman firing General Douglas MacArthur is one of the bravest things a president has ever done and is a much bigger deal than we give it credit for being. Random political history 🧵 time:
2/ Douglas MacArthur was one of the most famous and popular national heroes in America by the early 1950's. He was a veteran of both World Wars, a Medal of Honor recipient, and the General of the Army--basically, he was the most prominent military officer in the country.
3/ By 1951, Truman was a very unpopular president, but he had ambitions to run for a third term (he was the last president eligible to do so) and was trying to shore up his popularity in advance of a potential run in 1952.
🧵I agree with some, but not all, of this author's conclusions. I definitely experienced the "joys" of serving in a chronically low-baptizing mission. Tracting was essentially useless in Missouri--in two years I never got invited in a door through cold knocking. NOT. ONCE.
2/ That said, missionaries' priority should, at all times, be to invite others to come unto Christ. While service shouldn't be seen as cynically transactional (we help us, you listen to our message) we need to remember that missionaries aren't able to completely fulfill
3/ their purpose unless they're doing everything in their power to generate opportunities for teaching the gospel. Having been in a mission where traditional proselyting was relatively difficult, I know the value of service
2/ The first and most obvious issue is casting. The Harry Potter movies are pretty much flawlessly casted. There are those who will debate the merits of the two Dumbledores (though Richard Harris's death meant that someone would have to fill nearly impossible shoes),
3/ but beyond that minor controversy, nearly every role is perfect. Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, and Rupert Grint are forever enshrined as the greatest home runs in the history of child actor casting. Tom Felton, Bonnie Wright, and the Phelps twins were also brilliant choices.
Note: this thread is REALLY long, and the link to the unrolled “article” version is in a reply to this tweet.
I’ve decided to go ahead and post this. In talking about a mass shooting, I want to be sensitive and come at the subject from a place of concern, not political animus.
2/ I have a personal stake in this issue. My parents are both high school teachers and my grandmother is a retired pre-K teacher.
We have a lot of mass shootings in America. Like, a LOT. America is a statistical outlier in many areas, but it's not often as stark as this one.
3/ I think I've become somewhat numb to these tragedies. They happen with a certain regularity--each one dominating the news cycle for a couple days, only to disappear eventually with the exception of a brief later blurb about the shooter's trial if they happen to survive.
Well, just in case anyone cares, I guess I'll throw in my two cents about the whole Ensign Peak-SEC blowup. 🧵 time, because this stupid app still has a character limit.
First and foremost, it's worth pointing out that the Church had already identified a problem in its reporting
2/ well before the SEC became involved or even before that "whistleblower" from Ensign Peak said anything. Back in 2019, it corrected its reporting practices to bring them in line with SEC policy.
3/ Second, it's not as if the Church was trying to get away with or hide something nefarious here. If it were, I guarantee this SEC investigation would have ended with something a lot more serious than a settlement and token fine.
Herbert Hoover is a highly underrated president. The Great Depression started on his watch, and yes, he should have handled the situation better. But both before and after his presidency, he was among the great humanitarians in US history, and his work is worth knowing about. 🧵
2/ When World War I broke out in 1914, Hoover was in London, where he had been living for the last twelve years. Concerned for the nearly 100,000 American citizens trapped in Europe, he and some other American businessmen established a committee,
3/ which he chaired and which distributed aid to tens of thousands of people.
Then came the German invasion of Belgium. Germany mandated that the occupied Belgians could only import food and other needed supplies under the supervision of the neutral United States.