Remember: when you see the bitter apostate, you do not see only an absence of light, you see also the presence of darkness. Do not spread disease germs.

Chelsea Homer discusses writing the piece in a Mormon Stories interview. After her departure from the LDS Church and/or Mormon Stories interview, her blog post was subsequently removed from churchofjesuschrist.org contrary to Chelsea’s wishes. 2020 Failure to meet the 3% tolerance did not automatically amount to a material breach of contract. The relevant clause did not actually say the breach was material – only that reduction in room sizes would be material if over 3%. Although in White, factual causation was absent, it can be seen that in many circumstances it would easily be found. The victim in the example would still be alive if the punch had not been thrown. Indeed, it is possible that a chain of events could flow from a single act of a defendant. Suppose in the punch example, the victim was collected by ambulance and taken to hospital, but on the way to the hospital, the ambulance crashed into a school bus killing several of the children on the bus. But for the defendant’s punch, the children would still be alive. Could it be considered that the defendant caused the death of the children? Be Thou an Example,” Thomas S. Monson, First Counselor in the First Presidency, General Conference, April 2005. are not honest or sincere There is a superior intelligence bestowed upon such as obey the Gospel with full purpose of heart, which, if sinned against, the apostate is left naked and destitute of the Spirit of God, and he is, in truth, nigh unto cursing, and his end is to be burned. When once that light which was in them is taken from them they become as much darkened as they were previously enlightened, and then, no marvel, if all their power should be enlisted against the truth, and they, Judas-like, seek the destruction of those who were their greatest benefactors.

Brigham Young, Remarks delivered in the Bowery, JOD vol 12 may not have learned to listen to the Holy Ghost Factual causation is often alternatively known as ‘but for’ causation. The question that is asked is whether ‘but for’ the defendant’s actions, the harm to the victim would have occurred. In R v White [1910] 2 KB 124, the defendant laced his mother’s bedtime drink with potassium cyanide. When the mother was found dead the following morning, the defendant was charged with her murder. It subsequently came to light however, that the defendant’s mother had actually had very little of the drink and that her death was coincidental. The result was that the defendant could not be considered to have caused the death and was only guilty of attempted murder. I HAD sort of missed Lady Monk's involvement from a few days ago. Still I don't think it's incompatible with what I said. What we can't see is just which of them was more the mastermind behind the scenes. You can imagine the late night conversation: When we told my wife’s family that we were leaving the Mormon church, my father-in-law raised his arm to the square and used his … priesthood to cast Satan out of me … Didn’t work…

Rationalizing is excusing or defending unacceptable behavior. It is looking for a way to ease our consciences for doing something we know is wrong. How is rationalization a form of deception? How do we sometimes try to rationalize our behavior? Why is this dangerous?These elements may not be present and the defendant may avoid liability even if found to have factually caused the victim’s harm in two circumstances. These can be categorised as: Men begin to apostatize by taking to themselves strength, by hearkening to the whisperings of the enemy who leads them astray little by little, until they gather to themselves that which they call the wisdom of man; then they begin to depart from God, and their minds become confused.