"Childhood obesity is a growing problem" -DU Headline
Question #91664 posted on 09/22/2018 9 a.m.
Q:

Dear 100 Hour Board,

Can illegal immigrants (like with zero documentation, no work permit, nothing) attend BYU?

-Cerulean

A:

Dear Blue,

The short answer is yes. It's totally possible for an undocumented person to become a student at BYU or anywhere else. 

Basically, education is a public right, not just a right of citizens or people with visas. Finding funding may be more difficult for these students, but they if they can apply and get into a university and pay for it, they can attend there. There are only a few states that specifically restrict immigrants' access to public colleges, and from what I could find Utah isn't one of those states. In fact, according to this BYU Law School article, Utah is one of 16 states that actually allow undocumented students to qualify for in-state tuition if they meet certain requirements. The devotional by Carolina Nunez reinforced this fact. 

Cheers, 

Guesthouse


0 Corrections
Friday, September 21, 2018
Question #91660 posted on 09/21/2018 1:36 p.m.
Q:

Dear 100 Hour Board,

Can somebody explain Sam Young and the MTC president (unrelated stories but similar issues) to me? I have worked really close with so many lower-level (and sometimes upper-level) church leaders in the past and watching their goodness and untiring selfless dedication, I am inclined to always give the church the benefit of the doubt. On the surface though this all looks really really bad. Can you help me out?


-My Name Here

A:

Dear you,

I've tried typing this out multiple times, and I just can't do it. This is a really hard topic for me. So, while I don't want to belittle these very serious topics, I'm going to add a bit of humor to my answer, because I don't know how else I could bring myself to answer it.

So, you want to know how we can help you out? There's multiple ways we can help explain this situation for you: the easy, medium, and hard levels! Choose now your level of difficulty and read your explanation below:

EASY: Sam Young did something wrong to be excommunicated. He should have privately brought these things up with his leaders. By speaking publicly and involving the media, he's only hurt the Church's reputation and hurt the current members and those who might have joined the Church if not for his actions. As to Joseph Bishop, the MTC president—it's wrong that his accuser, McKenna Denson, is bringing this up, and bringing it up publicly, now. She's has a shady reputation, we can't fully trust what she says, and she deceived Bishop when his son said Bishop was on medication. These people are just trying to ruin the reputation of the Church, and we shouldn't be paying them any attention.

MEDIUM: Humans and institutions are complex. Both have good sides and bad sides. I'd like to believe that most leaders in the Church are good, because that's been my (and your) experience. In addition, the Church is an amazing institution that provides a great environment for people to learn about the gospel, learn about God, and learn to love and serve their fellow men and women. Unfortunately, there's also a bad side to this. Some leaders just make mistakes, some leaders take bad actions, and some leaders are legitimately bad people. The Church (as an institution, NOT the gospel) wants to protect its reputation and legal standing (you can read more on my views about that here). So the Church, as an institution, is trying to get rid of people who (rightly) bring these negative aspects into the light. That's a common action of institutions: protect the institution. But we always knew that the Church was led by men who make mistakes. Even members of the Twelve admit to it. But just as humans can change and do better, so can the Church. As long as we keep following the gospel, which is perfect, we can keep finding that good.

HARD: We have a sexual abuse problem in the Church. There's a podcast about a non-Mormon lawyer who has fought sexual abuse cases against both the LDS Church and the Catholic Church, and he freely admits that the LDS Church is also guilty of sex abuse, both of children and adults, and of acting to cover this abuse up. (I won't link to it because this is the hard level. You have to go searching for it.) The Church has covered up sexual abuse cases for years. (There's a MormonLeaks document about that. Again, you gotta search it out yourself.) Our reputation, apparently, is more important than victims. And the Church has a habit of excommunicating people who come forward and bring up legitimate questions and concerns, and then later making those changes themselves. Multiple scholars were excommunicated in 1993, but the Church cited their work when it released the church essays. Kate Kelly's movement helped the first woman give a prayer in General Conference in 2013, but she was excommunicated. Sam Young brought up the legitimate concern of bishops meeting with youth one-on-one and asking sexually explicit questions which can introduce them to masturbation, pornography, and other sexual matters (yes, it hasn't happened to everyone, myself included, but it has happened to a large enough number, including my roommate and Sam's children), and he was excommunicated. It looks really really bad because it is really really bad. We need to stop hiding these things and pretending they don't exist. We need to start conversations about this. Because if enough of us are talking about it (instead of hiding behind the "oh the Church is perfect anyone who says anything bad about it is a horrible person") then we might help inspire change. You can go back to the "medium" level and see that, just because we have these problems, it does not mean the gospel isn't true. It just means what the General Authorities have told us: the Church is run by imperfect men who make mistakes. We need to be talking about this. We need to help others see what's happening. Because maybe we'll cause change. Maybe we'll prevent the sexual abuse and assault of children, women, and men in the Church. Maybe we'll save lives.

-guppy of doom


0 Corrections
Question #91637 posted on 09/21/2018 10:43 a.m.
Q:

Dear 100 Hour Board,

How do I learn to like winter squash? I partly want to learn to like it because:
(1) it's quite nutritious
(2) it's readily available (at least, right now during harvest season!)
(3) it's fairly cheap for what you're getting

My problem is, though, that it's the one vegetable I've previously had a hard time choking down. At least, after my parents trying to "force-feed" 6-year-old me giant banana squash, and reluctantly trying to convince myself to purchase, bake, and eat an acorn squash my freshman year (and struggling to swallow after the 10th or 11th bite), I can't say I've had many positive experiences with this...fruit(?) before (except with spaghetti squash...and certain pumpkin-filled foods).

Yet, once again, I have somehow convinced myself to buy more winter squash (all of which almost seen to be staring at me from over on the table), and now wonder what I should do with them? What are good, "safe" ways to prepare them so that I might successfully gain a taste for them?

-Squashkin

P.S. The ones I have (besides one Butternut) resemble either the "Sweet Dumpling" variety or miniature Hubbard, if that makes any difference with recipes/cooking methods. But any general advice is welcome too.

A:

Dear you,

Never learn to like winter squash*. It is the one abominable vegetable**.

~Anathema

*Or you could take the more balanced approach to simply try it cooked different ways that are actually tasty, but who does that?

**Meaning it's the one vegetable I still dislike

A:

Dear friend, 

I too was once an adamant hater of squash... Until I found the right recipes, and now they're a grocery staple. I have tried almost all of these recipes and promise that you CAN learn to love winter squash in at least one of them:

My personal favorite is Butternut squash soup, but you can make a soup out of any of them, really. For example, here's the recipe for Hubbard Squash soup.  You can follow about the same procedure for all (except with spaghetti squash because that would be weird.) Sprinkled with green onions, some bacon, and parmesan cheese? The best fall comfort food you can easily afford. Makes great leftovers! 

You can also bake them in the oven as fries! They end up tasting sort of like sweet potato fries and are great with fry sauce

Or you can put them on pizza. (This recipe is just an example. When I make it I use normal pizza sauce, thin-sliced squash, caramelized onions, sausage, basil, and parmesan. Use your imagination!)

Or you could make a squash-alfredo sauce to put on pasta! (Which is SUPER DELICIOUS.)

Or you could make these delicious spaghetti squash and bacon fritters. They're totally going on my menu for the week...

Did you know you can also use butternuts for anything you would use pumpkin for? If you bake it in the oven you can mash it up and use it the same as you would pumpkin mash. You just flavor it with cinnamon & pumpkin pie spice. I actually think that "pumpkin" pie, made with butternuts, is BETTER. To cook your squash, just follow these basic instructions (sans salt-and-pepper.) I would imagine the other varieties would work too. 

If you don't want to make anything with that mashed squash, you can eat it with some butter and gravy much like mashed potatoes. 10/10 would recommend. 

Another thing I really like is pan-frying diced squash with salt, parmesan, olive oil (or butter), garlic, and some Italian herbs. Sometimes I throw some cauliflower in there as well. I like to eat these with some marinara sauce, or as a side for tomato soup. I suggest cutting off the skin, but you don't have to. This is the fastest recipe, so if your gourds are starting to go soft, it's a great way to use them. 

Now, I completely understand if you want something that tastes like the furthest thing from squash. Don't panic! There are plenty of ways to transform your gourds into something not even recognizable:

Winter squash bread (Which tastes sort of like a more subtle pumpkin bread, in my opinion)

Winter squash rolls (I haven't made these, but they look good!)

Butternut Brownies (Sounds risky. I can't endorse yet, but ratings were favorable.)

Winter Squash waffles (Nothing tastes like itself when it's covered in maple syrup!)

If you want more ideas, you can just plug "winter squash recipes" into Pinterest (the greatest idea pool of our generation). Allrecipes is also a great source, I particularly like their feature where you can omit ingredients you don't want. 

Good luck! Hopefully at least one of these ideas works for you. 

Cheers, 

Guesthouse (Who LOVES fall and all things squash) 

A:

Dear clearasil,

Squash goes well in coconut curry, say, Thai curry. This is my best suggestion.

Whilst a missionary, i decided one day to make the Harry Potter thing I thought sounded most delicious (after Canary Creams, anyways) and persuaded (read: tricked) another missionary into sipping a cold glass jar of the frothy orange liquid. He took a sip.
"Cloves. Cinammon. Sugar. And... is that... squash?"
"Yes!" I cackled, "You're drinking pumpkin juice!"

It was actually okay, but I later learned apparently people in England do not commonly drink pumpkin juice, as I'd mistakenly come to believe (they do, however, eat kidney pie, and something called spotted dicka steamed currant puddingso juice of squash wasn't really too far-fetched).

Of course, pumpkin juice can apparently be purchased for $28 for four at Universal Orlando, which seems lame. So I've procured a recipe from Anna Monette Roberts, via Popsugar, which I am including here in the fear that link will one day disappear and when I'm digging through the archives I'll never again be able to get my pumpkin juice fix:

Pumpkin Juice Recipe, by Anna Monette Roberts

Inspired by Harry Potter

Ingredients

  1. 1/2 pumpkin, seeds and stem removed, cut to fit juicer
  2. 1 red apple, core and stem removed, cut to fit juicer
  3. 1 Meyer lemon, cut to fit juicer
  4. 1-inch piece ginger, skin removed

Directions

  1. In a fruit and vegetable juicer, juice all ingredients. Discard solids. Strain juice through a fine-mesh sieve before serving in glasses. Add a few ice cubes to the glasses if you prefer a colder beverage. Serve immediately, or store in an airtight container and refrigerate for one day or up to three days, if using a masticating juicer.
Suerte,
 
--Ardilla Feroz

0 Corrections
Question #91652 posted on 09/21/2018 10:36 a.m.
Q:

Dear 100 Hour Board,

What are the most statistically dangerous hobbies? Are there hobbies people participate in that actually have a good chance of being deadly?

-Rainbow connection

A:

Dear Rainy Bow,

Everybody knows that watching Netflix when you have homework due the next day is extremely dangerous, yet people still do it. You think people would learn that their grades are no match for the "watch next episode button". 

Peace,

Tipperary

A:

Dear Aziraphale,

I'm not sure if this is the absolute statistically most dangerous sport, but extreme ironing has got to be up there.

~Anathema

A:

Dear Skittles,

For some of these it's hard to tell the statistical probability of dying if you try, because not very many people are crazy enough to actually do it. When I could find it, the micromort value is included. This is the risk of death as a unit of 1 in 1million (aka, 30 micromorts would mean 30/1,000,000 chance of death.)

Train surfing - no available micromort value, but the all-knowing Wikipedia said in Russia in 2011 over 100 people died, since the 1980s over 180 people have died in Australia, and 40 people in Germany in 2008 (it's particularly popular there). Not counted are all the people who die in circumstances surrounding overcrowded trains in India, Bangladesh, and other such places. It's illegal, but adrenaline junkies are gonna do what they're gonna do. Besides just being illegal, the death toll on this one seems very high.

Cliff Diving/Base Jumping has killed 311 people on record since 1981. Considering not many people are crazy enough to actually try it, it's pretty lethal. Couldn't find MM value. But it seems dangerous...

You would think skydiving, but at 10 Micromorts, it seems pretty mild. Giving birth is more likely to kill you than skydiving, at 120 Micromorts. Not that that's a hobby, it's just a fact. 

High-risk selfie-taking seems to also be a dangerous thing, especially in Russia. I couldn't find an official stat, but several people have died doing this. Turns out standing on top of really tall buildings isn't a great idea...

Climbing Mt. Everest is also very dangerous - between 12,000 and 40,000 micromorts on this. I found differing info. 

You should note that every time you do one of these things AGAIN, it increases your chance of dying while doing it. So really, none of them are safe hobbies if you do them very often. Stay safe folks. Do your homework and don't climb on top of buildings to take selfies. 

Cheers, 

Guesthouse. 


0 Corrections
Question #91659 posted on 09/21/2018 7:42 a.m.
Q:

Dear 100 Hour Board,

General conference is coming up, and rumor has it that two hour church might be in the works. My parents say that this has been a rumor for years, but it sounds like there might be some truth to it this time. I have a hard time believing that the Brethren would look at the challenges members of the Church face and conclude that less church would be what we need. I see the logic in having a two-hour block for some areas where meeting space is limited, but not necessarily in the Church as a whole. What are some reasons two hour church would be beneficial?
(Note- I'm not trying to attack the Church or President Nelson, just curious about why this might happen.)

-My Name Here

A:

Dear friend,

Even though having church for 3 hours is great(?), sometimes maximum productivity comes in having shorter, more meaningful meetings. I think the Brethren will probably encourage us to spend the extra time working on family history, ministering, or visiting family on Sunday. It also gives leadership (bishops in particular) more time to do their meetings as well. I can see a whole lot of good things coming out of it.  It highlights what I feel like is a move towards individual good works and focusing on ourselves, our families, and our communities more intently. 

Cheers, 

Guesthouse

A:

Dear person,

The benefit is we don't have to be at church for three hours.

-Sheebs

A:

Dear you,

It's possible that having a shorter Church block would also enable some people to appreciate Church more. As one example: I've got an 11 month-old, and I can tell you that there are very few times during the day that it's possible to have a 3 hour block that won't interrupt either the feeding/nursing schedule or the sleeping schedule, or both, of a child under one. Three hours is also just a long time for a little kid who can't go to nursery to be sat on laps or confined to playing in a 8 sq ft area in front of your folding chair/pew. Accordingly, 3 hour block means that I may be in the building for 3 hours, but I (or Man, Certainly) may well spend part of it feeding my son,  walking the halls to get him to sleep or give him a break, or being in class but paying near-zero attention because I'm focused on him. Now, I believe that parents who do this are going to be blessed for going to all 3 hours, even if they can't pay full attention or be in class all the time. Nevertheless, it'd be easier to schedule naps or feedings around a shorter block, which could eliminate the need for some of the 20-minute-step-out-of-class bits. 

There may be other categories of people, such as those with social or other anxiety, who would also be able to focus more effectively on their Sunday worship if faced with a shorter time period inside the building on Sundays. Guesthouse points out above that if we do go to 2 hour Church (I'm not holding my breath) it'll be because we're encouraged to be more proactive/responsible for our own spiritual activities. This could be a really great opportunity as long as we are willing to take it. 

Love,

~Anne, Certainly


0 Corrections
Thursday, September 20, 2018
Question #91658 posted on 09/20/2018 1:48 p.m.
Q:

Dear 100 Hour Board,

There is a rumor about church changing to two hours. Is this true? Would you be happy or sad?

Sign me up!

A:

Dear Clipboard Holder,

We can speculate about a two-hour block all we want, but ultimately there's no way to know until General Conference.

Personally, I'm not sure I would be all that thrilled by the change. I don't really go out and do things often, and church is one of the few ways I socialize. Sad as that may be, I like having the big block of time around other people, and I'm not sure what I'd even do with the extra time.

-Quixotic Kid

A:

Dear you,

2nd question: Ecstatic.

-apathetic

A:

Dear you,

There's been some wards who have been the "guinea pigs" of the 2 hour church (in the same way they had some missions be the trials for giving missionaries iPads before it became the official practice). Will it happen? Maybe. The Church doesn't implement everything they try out. So if you know anyone who's in one of those trial wards, tell them to act super, super happy at church and constantly bear their testimony about how 2 hour church has changed their lives and brought them closer to God.

(If you can't tell I would be overjoyed if we shortened church.)

-guppy of doom


0 Corrections