Christ is born in Bethlehem

The following are some wonderful and insightful words from Elder Jeffrey R. Holland on Christ's birth. In it, I think that he successfully describes aspects of the nativity that we maybe do not think of when we think of Christ's birth, but that add depth and reality and an increased awe at how it took place. Enjoy at this, the Christmas season.
~Carmen

"There are so many lessons to be learned from the sacred account of Christ’s birth that we always hesitate to emphasize one without considering all the others. Forgive me while I do just that in the time we have together here.

One impression which has persisted with me recently is that this is a story of intense poverty. I wonder if Luke did not have some special meaning when he wrote not “there was no room in the inn” but specifically that “there was no room for them in the inn.” (Luke 2:7.) We cannot be certain, but I would guess that money could buy influence in those days as well as in our own. I think if Joseph and Mary had been people of importance or wealth, they would have found lodging even at that busy time of year.

I have wondered if the Inspired Version also was suggesting they did not know any influential people when it says, “there was none to give room for them in the inn.” (JST, Luke 2:7.)

We cannot be certain what the historian intended, but we do know these two were desperately poor. At the purification offering which the parents made after the child’s birth, a turtledove was substituted for the required lamb, a substitution the Lord had allowed in the Law of Moses to ease the burden of the truly impoverished. (See Lev. 12:8.)

The wise men did come later bearing gifts, adding some splendor and wealth to this occasion, but it is important to note that they came from a distance, probably Persia, a trip of several hundred kilometers at the very least. Unless they started long before the star appeared, it is highly unlikely that they arrived on the night of the babe’s birth. Indeed, Matthew records that when they came Jesus was “a young child” and the family was living in “a house.” (Matt. 2:11.)

Perhaps this provides an important distinction we should remember in our own holiday season. Maybe the purchasing and the making and the wrapping and the decorating should be separated, if only slightly, from the more quiet, personal moments when we consider the meaning of the Baby (and his birth) who prompts the giving of such gifts.

The gold, frankincense, and myrrh were humbly given and appreciated. And so our gifts should be, every year and always. As my wife and children can testify, no one gets more giddy about the giving and receiving of presents than I do.

But for that very reason I, like you, need to remember the very plain scene, even the poverty, of a night devoid of tinsel or wrapping or goods of this world. Only when we see that single, sacred, unadorned object of our devotion—the Babe of Bethlehem—will we know why the giving of gifts is so appropriate.

As a father I have recently begun to think more often of Joseph, that strong, silent, almost unknown man who must have been more worthy than any other mortal man to be the guiding foster father of the living Son of God. It was Joseph selected from among all men who would teach Jesus to work. It was Joseph who taught him the books of the law. It was Joseph who, in the seclusion of the shop, helped him begin to understand who he was and ultimately what he was to become.

I was a student at Brigham Young University in Provo, Utah just finishing my first year of graduate work when our first child, a son, was born. We were very poor, though not as poor as Joseph and Mary. My wife and I were both going to school, both working and in addition we worked as head residents in an off-campus apartment complex to help pay our rent. We drove a little Volkswagen which had a half-dead battery because we couldn’t afford a new one (Volkswagen or battery!).

Nevertheless, when I realized that our own special night was coming, I believe I would have done any honorable thing in this world, and mortgaged my future, to make sure my wife had the clean sheets, the sterile utensils, the attentive nurses, and the skilled doctors who brought forth our firstborn son. If she or that child had needed special care at the finest private medical center I believe I would have ransomed my very life to get it.

I compare those feelings (which I have had with each succeeding child) with what Joseph must have felt as he moved through the streets of a city not his own, with not a friend or kinsman in sight, nor anyone willing to extend a helping hand. In these very last and most painful hours of her “confinement,” Mary had ridden or walked approximately 160 kilometers from Nazareth in Galilee to Bethlehem in Judea. Surely Joseph must have wept at her silent courage. Now, alone and unnoticed, they had to descend from human company to a stable, a grotto full of animals, there to bring forth the Son of God.

I wonder what emotions Joseph might have had as he cleared away the dung and debris. I wonder if he felt the sting of tears as he hurriedly tried to find the cleanest straw and hold the animals back. I wonder if he wondered: “Could there be a more unhealthy, a more disease-ridden, a more despicable circumstance in which a child could be born? Is this a place fit for a king? Should the mother of the Son of God be asked to enter the valley of the shadow of death (Ps. 23:4) in such a foul and unfamiliar place as this? Is it wrong to wish her some comfort? Is it right He should be born here?”

But I am certain Joseph did not mutter and Mary did not wail. They knew a great deal more and did the best they could.

Perhaps these parents knew even then that in the beginning of his mortal life, as well as in the end, this baby son born to them would have to descend beneath every human pain and disappointment. He would do so to help those who also felt they had been born without advantage.

I’ve thought of Mary, too, this most favored mortal woman in the history of the world, who as a mere child received an angel who uttered to her those words that would change the course not only of her own life but also that of all human history: “Hail, thou virgin, who art highly favored of the Lord. The Lord is with thee; for thou art chosen and blessed among women.” (JST, Luke 1:28.) The nature of her spirit and the depth of her preparation were revealed in a response that shows both innocence and maturity: “Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word.” (Luke 1:38.)

It is here I stumble, here that I grasp for the feelings a mother has when she knows she has conceived a living soul, feels life begin and grow within her womb, and carries a child to delivery. At such times fathers stand aside and watch, but mothers feel and never forget. Again, I’ve thought of Luke’s careful phrasing about that holy night in Bethlehem:

“The days were accomplished that she should be delivered.

“And she brought forth her first born son and (she) wrapped him in swaddling clothes, and (she) laid him in a manger.” (Luke 2:6–7.) Those brief pronouns trumpet in our ears that, second only to the child himself, Mary is the chiefest figure, the regal queen, mother of mothers—holding center stage in this grandest of all dramatic moments. And those same pronouns also trumpet that, except for her beloved husband, she was very much alone.

I have wondered if this young woman, something of a child herself, here bearing her first baby, might have wished her mother, or an aunt, or her sister, or a friend, to be near her through her labor. Surely the birth of such a son as this should command the aid and attention of every midwife in Judea! We all might wish that someone could have held her hand, cooled her brow, and when the ordeal was over, given her rest in clean, cool linen.

But it was not to be so. With only Joseph’s inexperienced assistance, she herself brought forth her firstborn son, wrapped him in the little clothes she had knowingly brought on her journey, and perhaps laid him on a pillow of hay.

Then on both sides of the veil a heavenly host broke into song, “Glory to God in the highest,” they sang, “and on earth, peace among men of good will.” (Luke 2:14, Phillips Translation.) But except for heavenly witnesses, these three were alone: Joseph, Mary, the baby to be named Jesus.

At this focal point of all human history, a point illuminated by a new star in the heavens revealed for just such a purpose, probably no other mortal watched—none but a poor young carpenter, a beautiful virgin mother, and silent stabled animals who had not the power to utter the sacredness of what they had seen.

Shepherds would soon arrive and later, wise men would follow from the East. But first and forever there was just a little family, without toys or trees or tinsel. With a baby—that’s how Christmas began.

It is for this baby that we should shout in chorus: “Hark the herald angels Sing Glory to the newborn King! Mild he lays his glory by, Born that man no more may die: Born to raise the sons of earth, Born to give them second birth.” (Hymns no. 60.)

Perhaps recalling the circumstances of that gift, of his birth, of his own childhood, perhaps remembering that purity and faith and genuine humility will be required of every celestial soul, Jesus must have said many times as he looked into the eyes of the children that loved him (eyes that always best saw what and who he really was), “except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.” (Matt. 18:3.)

Christmas, then, is for children—of all ages. I suppose that is why my favorite Christmas carol is a child’s song. I sing it with more emotion than any other:

Away in a manger, no crib for his bed.
The little Lord Jesus laid down his wee head. …
I love thee, Lord Jesus, look down from the sky
And stay by my side until morning is night …
Be near me, Lord Jesus, I ask thee to stay
Close by me forever and love me, I pray.
Bless all the dear children in thy tender care.
And take us to heaven to live with thee there. "(Sing with Me, p. F–2.)

Marriage

Ever since I can remember I've devoted a lot of thought to what marriage should be.

My parents divorced when I was nine. When they broke the news to us, I didn't even know what divorce was. As a teenager and beyond I have to say I analyzed everything I knew about their marriage from my own memories and from both of my parents "side" of the story over and over again. I watched my mom get married again and get divorced again, more data to mull over. I looked at both sets of grandparents (who are both past the 50th anniversary mark). Through high school and college my second family was my boyfriend, Cody's, family. I spent a lot of time with his parents and two married siblings. I have now spent the last five years looking at my husband, Curt's, parent's relationship.

I can safely say that most teenagers don't put much thought into the institution of marriage and how it plays into and affects family...but I can honestly say I put more than a decade of intense thought into the subject before I did marry. I was quiet about it. For something I thought about so often you would think that it would have made it into more conversations, but it was a deeply personal and sensitive subject for me.

I will share just a tiny slice of my conclusions here, but really, if I truly recorded all of them it would take up a book. Also...please don't take any of my statements to be feelings of condemnation. While I have strong feelings of what is right and try my very best to live them as not to be a hypocrite, I would be a sad and bitter person if I somehow thought it was my place to judge others based on this list...especially in this day and age.

1. The decision to marry is probably the most important decision in life. It affects everything.
It is not something to take lightly or quickly. Even if you date for a really long time, you cannot know everything about a person, but you have a better chance of gauging if you do have a lot of time. You also can have a cooler head if you can chill on the physical side, I already posted here about that.

2. Commitment is vital. Marriage should be approached with the attitude that it really is permanent. Divorce just cannot be a fall back. (Disclaimer: there are cases where divorce is appropriate, but they are rare, like really severely rare. Like one person is crazy rare.) I have had some real eye opening experiences lately on how typical people currently view marriage. When learning that I quit my project manager job to move here so that my husband could go to grad school, they say things like "that was nice, I wouldn't do that", "I wouldn't sacrifice my career for a spouse", or the best one (read stupidest, and yes, they really did say this) "well at least if he makes more money you'll get better alimony". WHAT!?! Are you kidding me? How sad that it is just assumed that all marriage ends in divorce, the only variance being how long it lasts.

3. Communication is absolutely key. It has always surprised me when I hear comments from one or the other of a couple insinuating that there are things that they do/buy/think that their spouse does not know about. Sometimes they blame the gender gap, thinking that it is just natural that they don't think the same. Sometimes there's an assumption that they just wouldn't understand (i.e. is not smart enough in an area, like with finances). Sometimes the excluded spouse is perfectly inclined to the exclusion. This is ridiculous. In my opinion there is no room for this in a marriage that functions how marriage was intended to work.
There needs to be talk, there needs to be real input from both spouses on child rearing, budgets, politics, everything. Talk. Know who the heck you married. Even if you are terrible with money, it does not excuse you from knowing what is going on and being a budget participant, otherwise you are just a lazy drain. You are missing out on the best your marriage could be.

I think this is as long as I am going to post today, this is the basics. Like I said, I could probably go on and on and on. I will probably do more posts on this topic over time.

Reason, oh how I love reason

Measured Voices Provide Reason, Support Amidst Proposition 8 Reaction

http://newsroom.lds.org/ldsnewsroom/eng/news-releases-stories/measured-voices-provide-reason-support-amidst-proposition-8-reaction

SALT LAKE CITY 21 November 2008 Following the passing of Proposition 8 in California, the Church released statements urging civility and reaffirming its position on the issue. The Church also noted that two Roman Catholic bishops released statements decrying religious bigotry against Mormons. The Church today points to additional third-party voices that provide useful insights into the reaction following the vote. Some of these individuals supported Proposition 8, and some were against it.

These materials may be helpful to the news media, bloggers, Church members and the general public in gaining a broader view of the aftermath of the Proposition 8 vote. All people of faith have cause for concern when others try to remove their legitimate voice from the public square.

Anti-Defamation League Condemns Criminal Activity Targeting Religious Institutions That Supported Proposition 8

"Although we strongly opposed Proposition 8, its passage does not justify the defacement and destruction of property. We urge Californians to channel their frustration and disappointment in productive and responsible ways to work towards full equality for all Americans. To plac e anyone in fear of threat to their houses of worship or their personal security because they have expressed deeply held religious views is contrary to everything this nation represents. Our Constitution's First Amendment protects freedom of speech, freedom of assembly and freedom of religion for all of us."

Dallas Morning News Editorial: Protest and Civility in a Democracy

"But a vicious minority is not satisfied with that. Some gay rights protesters have voiced sentiments about Mormons, whose church was active in advocating Prop 8's passage, that if said about gays would be condemned as hate speech. Vandals have struck a number of Mormon temples. Bash Back, a pro-gay group in Olympia, Wash., trashed a Mormon temple there, then issued a statement saying, 'Let this be a warning to the Mormon church: Dissolve completely or be destroyed.'

"Gay rights extremists should ask themselves the same question. A cause, no matter how just, can only be harmed by thuggish tactics. Our pluralist democracy depends on a citizenry committed to working out differences with civility."

Michael Barber, Professor of Theology, Scripture & Christian Thought at John Paul the Great Catholic University

"… we found it appalling that in the final days of the campaign, opponents of Proposition 8 ran an ad in which Mormon missionaries were presented as barging into a same-sex couple's home, gleefully rummaging through their personal possessions and violating their rights. The ad attempted to ridicule people of the Mormon faith, even implying that it was wrong that they contributed money to the election. As a Catholic school, we stand beside our friends in the Mormon Church and of people of faith who work tirelessly to preserve the freedom of religion in America. We also strongly oppose any attempt to ridicule another person's faith, even faiths with which we have strong historical and theological disagreements."

The First Amendment Center — Charles Haynes: When the Marriage Debate Turns Ugly, No One Wins

"Mormons are taking the biggest hit from the opposition. But as protests, boycotts and blacklists targeting Mormons proliferate, it's worth pausing to think about where this collision is headed. … Before this clash escalates further, both sides should exercise caution and reconsider their battle plans going forward."

The Christian Post — Chuck Colson: So Much for Tolerance

"Two days after the election, 2,000 homosexual protesters surrounded a Mormon temple in Los Angeles chanting 'Mormon scum.' Protesters picketed Rick Warren's Saddleback Church, holding signs reading 'Purpose-Driven Hate.' Calvary Chapel in Chino Hills was spray painted. Church members' cars have been vandalized, and at least two Christians were assaulted. Protesters even hurled racial epithets at African-Americans because African-Americans voted overwhelmingly in favor of traditional marriage. What hypocrisy from those who spend all of their time preaching tolerance to the rest of us!"

Beliefnet.com — Rod Dreher: Stand By the Mormons

"Now is the time for traditional Christians — Catholic, Protestant and Orthodox — to come to the aid of our Mormon friends. They put themselves on the front line of the traditional marriage battle like no other church group. And now individual Mormons are paying a terrible price for standing up for something we all believe in. I don't know how we can stand with them from afar, but at least we can thank them, and speak out when we see them being abused. We might also think again about how we view them. … I have deep disagreements with Mormon theology. But they are our friends and allies and fellow citizens, and they deserve our thanks and support."

John Mark Reynolds, Philosophy Professor at Biola University – California and Thank-a-Mormon Day

"In the battle for the family, however, traditional Christians have no better friends than the Mormon faithful. It would be wrong if that support were taken for granted. We are intolerant of the false attacks on Mormon faith and family. We stand with our Mormon friends in their right to express their views on the public square. We celebrate the areas, such as family values, where we agree. A heart felt thank you may not win points from other friends who demand one hundred percent agreement from their allies, but it is the decent and proper thing to do. Thank you to our Mormon friends and allies!"

The Volokh Conspiracy — Dale Carpenter: An Alternative to Anti-Mormon Protests

"Here's my advice to=2 0righteously furious gay-marriage supporters: Stop the focus on the Mormon Church. Stop it now. We just lost a ballot fight in which we were falsely but effectively portrayed as attacking religion. So now some of us attack a religion? People were warned that churches would lose their tax-exempt status, which was untrue. So now we have (frivolous) calls for the Mormon Church to lose its tax-exempt status? It's rather selective indignation, anyway, since lots of demographic groups gave us Prop 8 in different ways — some with money and others with votes. I understand the frustration, but this particular expression of it is wrong and counter-productive."

sore losers...

I love this article, "The right to win".

Fair play is only upheld when the majority demand it. What happens when the majority turn a blind eye?

"Meeting the challenges of today"

I find this talk particularly applicable to today, even though it was given 30 years ago. It supports my belief that God has raised prophets in this day and age to help guide us in a time that is unique in the history of the world. The words of ancient prophets in the scriptures are important and still hold true, but sometimes they just are not specific to the battles that rage around us right now. God is the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow. He loves His people and He sends prophets.

I have bolded items that I feel awed to read; so very, very true. Elder Maxwell truly knows this world and the hearts of men.


"Meeting the challenges of today" - Neal A. Maxwell, Oct. 10, 1978


Discipleship includes good citizenship; and in this connection, if you are careful students of the statements of the modern prophets, you will have noticed that with rare exceptions--especially when the First Presidency has spoken out--the concerns expressed have been over moral issues, not issues between political parties. The declarations are about principles, not people, and causes, not candidates. On occasions, at other levels in the Church, a few have not been so discreet, so wise, or so inspired.

But make no mistake about it, brothers and sisters; in the months and years ahead, events will require of each member that he or she decide whether or not he or she will follow the First Presidency. Members will find it more difficult to halt longer between two opinions (see 1 Kings 18:21).

President Marion G. Romney said, many years ago, that he had "never hesitated to follow the counsel of the Authorities of the Church even though it crossed my social, professional, or political life" (CR, April 1941, p. 123). This is a hard doctrine, but it is a particularly vital doctrine in a society which is becoming more wicked. In short, brothers and sisters, not being ashamed of the gospel of Jesus Christ includes not being ashamed of the prophets of Jesus Christ.

We are now entering a period of incredible ironies. Let us cite but one of these ironies which is yet in its subtle stages: we shall see in our time a maximum if indirect effort made to establish irreligion as the state religion. It is actually a new form of paganism that uses the carefully preserved and cultivated freedoms of Western civilization to shrink freedom even as it rejects the value essence of our rich Judeo-Christian heritage.

M. J. Sobran wrote recently:

The Framers of the Constitution . . . forbade the Congress to make any law "respecting" the establishment of religion, thus leaving the states free to do so (as several of them did); and they explicitly forbade the Congress to abridge "the free exercise" of religion, thus giving actual religious observance a rhetorical emphasis that fully accords with the special concern we know they had for religion. It takes a special ingenuity to wring out of this a governmental indifference to religion, let alone an aggressive secularism. Yet there are those who insist that the First Amendment actually proscribes governmental partiality not only to any single religion, but to religion as such; so that tax exemption for churches is now thought to be unconstitutional. It is startling [she continues] to consider that a clause clearly protecting religion can be construed as requiring that it be denied a status routinely granted to educational and charitable enterprises, which have no overt constitutional protection. Far from equalizing unbelief, secularism has succeeded in virtually establishing it.

[She continues:] What the secularists are increasingly demanding, in their disingenuous way, is that religious people, when they act politically, act only on secularist grounds. They are trying to equate acting on religion with establishing religion. And--I repeat--the consequence of such logic is really to establish secularism. It is in fact, to force the religious to internalize the major premise of secularism: that religion has no proper bearing on public affairs. [Human Life Review, Summer 1978, pp. 51–52, 60–61]

Brothers and sisters, irreligion as the state religion would be the worst of all combinations. Its orthodoxy would be insistent and its inquisitors inevitable. Its paid ministry would be numerous beyond belief. Its Caesars would be insufferably condescending. Its majorities--when faced with clear alternatives--would make the Barabbas choice, as did a mob centuries ago when Pilate confronted them with the need to decide.

Your discipleship may see the time come when religious convictions are heavily discounted. M. J. Sobran also observed, "A religious conviction is now a second-class conviction, expected to step deferentially to the back of the secular bus, and not to get uppity about it" (Human Life Review, Summer 1978, p. 58). This new irreligious imperialism seeks to disallow certain of people's opinions simply because those opinions grow out of religious convictions. Resistance to abortion will soon be seen as primitive. Concern over the institution of the family will be viewed as untrendy and unenlightened.

In its mildest form, irreligion will merely be condescending toward those who hold to traditional Judeo-Christian values. In its more harsh forms, as is always the case with those whose dogmatism is blinding, the secular church will do what it can to reduce the influence of those who still worry over standards such as those in the Ten Commandments. It is always such an easy step from dogmatism to unfair play--especially so when the dogmatists believe themselves to be dealing with primitive people who do not know what is best for them. It is the secular bureaucrat's burden, you see.

Am I saying that the voting rights of the people of religion are in danger? Of course not! Am I saying, "It's back to the catacombs?" No! But there is occurring a discounting of religiously-based opinions. There may even be a covert and subtle disqualification of some for certain offices in some situations, in an ironic "irreligious test" for office.

However, if people are not permitted to advocate, to assert, and to bring to bear, in every legitimate way, the opinions and views they hold that grow out of their religious convictions, what manner of men and women would they be, anyway? Our founding fathers did not wish to have a state church established nor to have a particular religion favored by government. They wanted religion to be free to make its own way. But neither did they intend to have irreligion made into a favored state church. Notice the terrible irony if this trend were to continue. When the secular church goes after its heretics, where are the sanctuaries? To what landfalls and Plymouth Rocks can future pilgrims go?

If we let come into being a secular church shorn of traditional and divine values, where shall we go for inspiration in the crises of tomorrow? Can we appeal to the rightness of a specific regulation to sustain us in our hours of need? Will we be able to seek shelter under a First Amendment which by then may have been twisted to favor irreligion? Will we be able to rely for counterforce on value education in school systems that are increasingly secularized? And if our governments and schools were to fail us, would we be able to fall back upon the institution of the family, when so many secular movements seek to shred it?

It may well be, as our time comes to "suffer shame for his name" (Acts 5:41), that some of this special stress will grow out of that portion of discipleship which involves citizenship. Remember that, as Nephi and Jacob said, we must learn to endure "the crosses of the world" (2 Nephi 9:18) and yet to despise "the shame of [it]" (Jacob 1:8). To go on clinging to the iron rod in spite of the mockery and scorn that flow at us from the multitudes in that great and spacious building seen by Father Lehi, which is the "pride of the world," is to disregard the shame of the world (1 Nephi 8:26–27, 33; 11:35–36). Parenthetically, why--really why--do the disbelievers who line that spacious building watch so intently what the believers are doing? Surely there must be other things for the scorners to do--unless, deep within their seeming disinterest, there is interest.

If the challenge of the secular church becomes very real, let us, as in all other human relationships, be principled but pleasant. Let us be perceptive without being pompous. Let us have integrity and not write checks with our tongues which our conduct cannot cash.

Before the ultimate victory of the forces of righteousness, some skirmishes will be lost. Even these, however, must leave a record so that the choices before the people are clear and let others do as they will in the face of prophetic counsel. There will also be times, happily, when a minor defeat seems probable, that others will step forward, having been rallied to righteousness by what we do. We will know the joy, on occasion, of having awakened a slumbering majority of the decent people of all races and creeds--a majority which was, till then, unconscious of itself.

Jesus said that when the fig trees put forth their leaves "summer is nigh" (Matthew 24:32). Thus warned that summer is upon us, let us not then complain of the heat.

Have I come today only to add one more to the already long list of special challenges faced by you and me? Not really. I have also come to say to you that God, who foresaw all challenges, has given to us a precious doctrine which can encourage us in meeting this and all other challenges.

The combined doctrine of God's foreknowledge and of foreordination is one of the doctrinal roads least traveled by, yet these clearly underline how very long and how perfectly God has loved us and known us with our individual needs and capacities. Isolated from other doctrines or mishandled, though, these truths can stoke the fires of fatalism, impact adversely upon our agency, cause us to focus on status rather than service, and carry us over into predestination. President Joseph Fielding Smith once warned:

It is very evident from a thorough study of the gospel and the plan of salvation that a conclusion that those who accepted the Savior were predestined to be saved no matter what the nature of their lives must be an error. . . . Surely Paul never intended to convey such a thought. [The Improvement Era, May 1963, pp. 350–51]

Paul, you will recall, brothers and sisters, stressed running the life's race the full distance; he did not intend a casual Christianity in which some had won the race even before the race had started.

Yet, though foreordination is a difficult doctrine, it has been given to us by the living God, through living prophets, for a purpose. It can actually increase our understanding of how crucial this mortal estate is and it can encourage us in further good works. This precious doctrine can also help us to go the second mile because we are doubly called.

In some ways, our second estate, in relationship to our first estate, is like agreeing in advance to surgery. Then the anesthetic of forgetfulness settles in upon us. Just as doctors do not de-anesthetize a patient in the midst of authorized surgery to ask him again if the surgery should be continued, so, after divine tutoring, we agreed once to come here and to submit ourselves to certain experiences and have no occasion to revoke that decision.

Of course, when we mortals try to comprehend, rather than merely accept, foreordination, the result is one in which finite minds futilely try to comprehend omniscience. A full understanding is impossible; we simply have to trust in what the Lord has told us, knowing enough, however, to realize that we are not dealing with guarantees from God but extra opportunities--and heavier responsibilities. If those responsibilities are in some ways linked to past performance or to past capabilities, it should not surprise us.

The Lord has said,

There is a law, irrevocably decreed in heaven before the foundations of this world, upon which all blessings are predicated--

And when we obtain any blessing from God, it is by obedience to that law upon which it is predicated. [D&C 130: 20–21]

This is an eternal law, brothers and sisters--it prevailed in the first estate as well as in the second. It should not disconcert us, therefore, that the Lord has indicated that he chose some individuals before they came here to carry out certain assignments and, hence, these individuals have been foreordained to those assignments. "Every man who has a calling to minister to the inhabitants of the world was ordained to that very purpose in the Grand Council of Heaven before the world was. I suppose that I was ordained to this very office in that Grand Council" (Joseph Fielding Smith, comp., Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 365).

Foreordination is like any other blessing--it is a conditional bestowal subject to our faithfulness. Prophesies foreshadow events without determining the outcomes, because of a divine foreseeing of outcomes. So foreordination is a conditional bestowal of a role, a responsibility, or a blessing which, likewise, foresees but does not fix the outcome.

There have been those who have failed or who have been treasonous to their trust such as David, Solomon, Judas. God foresaw the fall of David, but was not the cause of it. It was David who saw Bathsheba from the balcony and sent for her. But neither was God surprised by such a sad development. God foresaw, but did not cause, Martin Harris's loss of certain pages of the translated Book of Mormon; God made plans to cope with that failure over fifteen hundred years before it was to occur (see D&C 10 and Words of Mormon).

Thus foreordination is clearly no excuse for fatalism or arrogance or the abuse of agency. It is not, however, a doctrine that can simply be ignored because it is difficult. Indeed, deep inside the hardest doctrines are some of the pearls of greatest price. The doctrine pertains not only to the foreordination of the prophets, but to each of us. God--in his precise assessment, beforehand, as to those who will respond to the words of the Savior and the prophets--is a part of the plan. From the Savior's own lips came these words: "I am the good shepherd, and know my sheep, and am known of mine" (John 10:14). Similarly the Savior said, "My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me" (John 10:27). And further in this dispensation, he declared, "And ye are called to bring to pass the gathering of mine elect; for mine elect hear my voice and harden not their hearts" (D&C 29:7).

This responsiveness could not have been gauged without divine foreknowledge concerning all of us mortals and our response, one way or another, to the gospel. God's foreknowledge is so perfect it leaves the realm of prediction and enters the realm of prophecy.

The foreseeing of those who would accept the gospel in mortality, gladly and with alacrity, is based upon their parallel responsiveness in the premortal world. No wonder the Lord could say as he did to Jeremiah, "Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; . . . and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations" (Jeremiah 1:5). Paul, when writing to the saints in Rome, said, "God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew" (Romans 11:2). Paul also said of God that "he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world" (Ephesians 1:4).

The Lord, who was able to say to his disciples, "Cast the net on the right side of the ship," knew beforehand there was a multitude of fishes there (John 21:6). If he knew beforehand the movements and whereabout of fishes in the little Sea of Tiberias, should it offend us that he knows beforehand which mortals will come into the gospel net?

It does no violence even to our frail human logic to observe that there cannot be a grand plan of salvation for all mankind, unless there is also a plan for each individual. The salvational sum will reflect all its parts. Once the believer acknowledges that the past, present, and future are before God simultaneously--even though we do not understand how--then the doctrine of foreordination may be seen somewhat more clearly. For instance, it was necessary for God to know how the economic difficulties and crop failures of the Joseph Smith, Senior, family in New England would move this special family to Cumorah country where the Book of Mormon plates were buried. God's plans could scarcely have so unfolded if--willy-nilly--the Smiths had been born Manchurians and if, meanwhile, the plates had been buried in Belgium!

The Lord would need to have perfect comprehension of all the military and political developments, including those now underway in the Middle East--which, when they unfold, will combine to bring to pass a latter-day condition in which "all nations" will be gathered against Jerusalem to battle (Zechariah 14:2–4). It should not surprise us that the Lord who notices the fall of each sparrow and the hair from every head would know centuries before how much money Judas would receive--thirty pieces of silver--at the time he betrayed the Savior (Matthew 26:15; 27:3; Zechariah 11:12).

Quite understandably, the manner in which things unfold seems to us mortals to be so natural. Our not knowing what is to come (in the perfect way that God knows) thus preserves our free agency completely. When, through a process we call inspiration and revelation, we are permitted at times to tap that divine databank, we are accessing, for the narrow purposes at hand, the knowledge of God. No wonder that experience is so unforgettable!

There are clearly special cases of individuals in mortality who have special limitations in life, which conditions we mortals cannot now fully fathom. For all we now know, the seeming limitations may have been an agreed-upon spur to achievement--a "thorn in the flesh." Like him who was blind from birth, some come to bring glory to God (John 9:1–3). We must be exceedingly careful about imputing either wrong causes or wrong rewards to all in such circumstances. They are in the Lord's hands, and he loves them perfectly. Indeed, some of those who have required much waiting upon in this life may be waited upon again by the rest of us in the next world--but for the highest of reasons.

Thus, when we are elected to certain mortal chores, we are elected "according to the foreknowledge of God the Father" (1 Peter 1:2). When Abraham was advised that he "was chosen before he was born," and that he was among the "noble and great ones" (Abraham 3:22–23), we received a marvelous insight. Through the revelation given to us by the prophet Joseph F. Smith we read that "The Prophet Joseph Smith, . . . Hyrum Smith, Brigham Young, John Taylor, Wilford Woodruff, and other choice spirits" were also reserved by God "to come forth in the fullness of times to take part in laying the foundations of the great latter-day work" (JFS Vision 53). These individuals are among the rulers whom Abraham had described to him centuries earlier by God. They were to be "rulers in the Church of God" (JFS Vision 55), not necessarily rulers in secular kingdoms. Thus those seen by Abraham were the Pauls, not the Caesars; the Spencer W. Kimballs, not the Churchills. Wise secular leaders do much lasting and commendable good; but as Paul observed to the saints in Corinth, as the world measured greatness and wisdom "not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called" (1 Corinthians 1:26).

President Joseph Fielding Smith wrote: "In regard to the holding of the priesthood in preexistence, I will say that there was an organization there just as well as an organization here, and men there held authority. Men chosen to positions of trust in the spirit world held priesthood" (Doctrines of Salvation 3:81). Alma speaks about foreordination with great effectiveness and links it to the foreknowledge of God and, perhaps, even to our previous performance (Alma 13:3–5). The omniscience of God made it possible, therefore, for him to determine the boundaries and times of nations (Acts 17:26; Deuteronomy 32:8).

Elder Orson Hyde said of our life in the premortal world, "We understood things better there than we do in this lower world." Elder Hyde also surmised as to the agreements we made there as follows: "It is not impossible that we signed the articles thereof with our own hands,--which articles may be retained in the archives above, to be presented to us when we rise from the dead, and be judged out of our own mouths, according to that which is written in the books." Just because we have forgotten, said Elder Hyde, "our forgetfulness cannot alter the facts" (Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses 7:314–15). Brothers and sisters, the degree of detail involved in the covenants and promises we participated in at that time may be a much more highly customized thing than many of us surmise. Yet, on occasion even with our forgetting, there may be inklings. President Joseph F. Smith wrote:

But in coming here, we forget all, that our agency might be free indeed, to choose good or evil, that we might merit the reward of our own choice and conduct. But by the power of the Spirit, in the redemption of Christ through obedience, we often catch a spark from the awakened memories of the immortal soul, which lights up our whole being as with the glory of our former home. [Gospel Doctrines, pp. 13–14; emphasis added]

As indicated earlier, this powerful teaching of foreordination is bound to be a puzzlement in some respects, especially if we do not have faith and trust in the Lord. Yet if we think about it, even within our finite framework of experience, it should not startle us. Mortal parents are reasonably good at predicting the behavior of their children in certain circumstances. Of this Elder James E. Talmage wrote:

Our Heavenly Father has a full knowledge of the nature and disposition of each of His children, a knowledge gained by long observation and experience in the past eternity of our primeval childhood; a knowledge compared with which that gained by earthly parents through mortal experience with their children is infinitesimally small. By reason of that surpassing knowledge, God reads the future of child and children, of men individually and of men collectively as communities and nations; He knows what each will do under given conditions, and sees the end from the beginning. His foreknowledge is based on intelligence and reason. He foresees the future as a state which naturally and surely will be; not as one which must be because He has arbitrarily willed that it shall be.--From the author's Great Apostasy, pp. 19, 20. [Jesus the Christ, p. 29]

Another helpful analogy for students is the reality that universities, including this one, can and do predict with a high degree of accuracy the grades entering students will receive in their college careers based upon certain tests, past performances, and so forth. If mortals can do this with reasonable accuracy (and even with a short span of familiarity and finite data), God, the Father, who knows us perfectly, surely can foresee how we will respond to various challenges. While we often do not rise to our opportunities, God is neither pleased nor surprised. But we cannot say to him later on that we could have achieved if we had just been given the chance! This is all part of the justice of God.

One of the most helpful--indeed very necessary--parallel truths to be pondered when studying this powerful doctrine of foreordination is given in the revelation of the Lord to Moses in which the Lord says, "And all things are present with me, for I know them all" (Moses1:6). God does not live in the dimension of time as do we. Moreover, since "all things are present with" God, his is not simply a predicting based solely upon the past. In ways which are not clear to us, he actually sees, rather than foresees, the future--because all things are, at once, present before him.

In a revelation given to the Prophet Joseph Smith, the Lord described himself as "The same which knoweth all things, for all things are present before mine eyes" (D&C 38:2). From the prophet Nephi we receive the same basic insight in which we, likewise, must trust: "But the Lord knoweth all things from the beginning; wherefore, he prepareth a way to accomplish all his works among the children of men" (1 Nephi 9:6). It was by divine design that Mary became the mother of Jesus. Further, Lucy Mack Smith, who played such a crucial role in the rearing of Joseph Smith, did not come to that assignment by chance.

One of the dimensions of worshipping a living God is to know that he is alive and living in the sense of seeing and acting. He is not a retired God whose best years are past, to whom we should pay a retroactive obeisance, worshipping him for what he has already done. He is the living God who is, at once, in all the dimensions of time--the past and present and future--while we labor constrained by the limitations of time itself.

It is imperative, brothers and sisters, that we always keep in mind the caveats noted earlier, so that we do not indulge ourselves or our whims, simply because of the presence of this powerful doctrine of foreordination, for with special opportunities come special responsibilities and much greater risks. But the doctrine of foreordination properly understood and humbly pursued can help us immensely in coping with the vicissitudes of life. Otherwise, time can tug at us and play so many tricks upon us. We should always understand that while God is never surprised, we often are.

Life episodes can take on a new meaning. For instance, Simon, the Cyrenian, wandered into Jerusalem that very day and was pressed into service by Roman soldiers to help carry the cross of Christ (see Mark 15:21). Simon's son, Rufus, joined the Church, and was so well thought of by the apostle Paul that the latter mentioned Rufus in his epistle to the Romans, describing him as "chosen in the Lord" (Romans 16:13). Was it, therefore, a mere accident that Simon "who passed by, coming out of the country" (Mark 15:21), was asked to bear the cross of Jesus?

Properly humbled and instructed concerning the great privileges that are ours, we can cope with what seem to be very dark days and difficult developments, because we will have a true perspective about "things as they really are," and we can see in them a great chance to contribute. Churchill, in trying to rally his countrymen in an address at Harrow School in October of 1941, said to them:

Do not let us speak of darker days; let us speak rather of sterner days. These are not dark days: these are great days--the greatest days our country has ever lived; and we must all thank God that we have been allowed, each of us according to our stations, to play a part in making these days memorable in the history of our race. [Bartlett's Familiar Quotations, p. 923]

Brothers and sisters, so we should regard the dispensation of the fullness of times--even when we face stern challenges and circumstances, "these are great days"! Our hearts need not fail us. We can be equal to our challenges, including the aforementioned challenge of the secular church.

The truth about foreordination also helps us to taste the deep wisdom of Alma, when he said we ought to be content with things that God hath allotted to each of us (Alma 29:3, 4). If, indeed, the things allotted to each of us have been divinely customized according to our ability and capacity, then for us to seek to wrench ourselves free of our schooling circumstances could be to tear ourselves away from carefully matched opportunities. To rant and to rail could be to go against divine wisdom, wisdom in which we may have once concurred before we came here. God knew beforehand each of our coefficients for coping and contributing and has so ordered our lives.

The late President Henry D. Moyle said,

I believe that we, as fellow workers in the priesthood, might well take to heart the admonition of Alma and be content with that which God hath allotted us. We might well be assured that we had something to do with our "allotment" in our preexistent state. This would be an additional reason for us to accept our present condition and make the best of it. It is what we agreed to do. [CR, October 1952, p. 71]

By the way, brothers and sisters, I hasten to add that among the things "allotted" are not included things like a bad temper. The deficiencies of a developmental variety are those we are expected to overcome.

Now, as I prepare to conclude, may I point out what a vastly different view of life the doctrine of foreordination gives to us. Shorn of this perspective, others are puzzled or bitter about life. Without gospel perspective life would be a punishment, not a joy--like trying to play a game of billiards on a table with a rumpled cloth, with a crooked cue and an elliptical billiard ball (from Sir William S. Gilbert's libretto of The Mikado). (Perhaps the moral of that analogy is that we should stay out of pool halls.) In any event, pessimism does not really reckon with life and the universe as these things "really are." The disciple will be puzzled at times, too. But he persists. Later he rejoices over how wonderfully things fit together, realizing only then that, with God, things never were apart.

Jacob said that the Spirit teaches us the truth "of things as they really are, and of things as they really will be" (Jacob 4:13). Centuries later Paul said that the "Spirit searcheth . . . the deep things of God" (1 Corinthians 2:10). Of some of these deep things we have spoken today, and of how things really are. Brothers and sisters, in some of those precious and personal moments of deep discovery, there will be a sudden surge of recognition of an immortal insight, a doctrinal déjà vu. We will sometimes experience a flash from the mirror of memory that beckons us forward toward a far horizon.

When in situations of stress we wonder if there is any more in us to give, we can be comforted to know that God, who knows our capacity perfectly, placed us here to succeed. No one was foreordained to fail or to be wicked. When we have been weighed and found wanting, let us remember that we were measured before and we were found equal to our tasks; and, therefore, let us continue, but with a more determined discipleship. When we feel overwhelmed, let us recall the assurance that God will not overprogram us; he will not press upon us more than we can bear (D&C 50:40).

The doctrine of foreordination, therefore, is not a doctrine of repose; it is a doctrine for the second-milers; it can draw out of us the last full measure of devotion. It is a doctrine of perspiration, not aspiration. Moreover, it discourages aspiring, lest we covet, like two early disciples, that which has already been given to another (Matthew 20:20–23). Foreordination is a doctrine for the deep believer and will only bring scorn from the skeptic.

When, as Joseph F. Smith said, we "catch a spark from the awakened memories of the immortal soul," let us be quietly grateful. And when of great truths we can come to say "I know," that powerful spiritual witness may also carry with it the sense of our having known before. With rediscovery, what we are really saying is, "I know--again!" No wonder that, so often, real teaching is mere reminding.

God bless you and keep you, my special friends, to the end that you will each carry out all of the assignments given to you so very long ago. You have been measured and found adequate for the challenges that will face you as citizens of the kingdom of God; of that you should have a deep inner assurance. Be true to that trust, as all of us must, I pray in the name of Jesus Christ. Amen.

a super orator

I think that Barack Obama is a good person.
I always have.
I don't think that he would ever cheat on his wife and I admire how hard he has worked to get where he is today.
I love that he, as a person who has a portion of African blood running through his veins, has succeeded; obliterating obstacles.

My problem has always been that I think that he is too much of an idealist.
He seems to believe that if the government intercedes, scores of people will all of a sudden put forth the effort necessary to excel in life.

Maybe I'm too much of a cynic.
I sure hope so, because we're about to find out.

At any rate, he is a first class orator. The following video gave me goosebumps.
I hope against all hope that the things he wants to come about come to pass.



See? He talks about individual responsibility and service. I can totally jive with that line of thinking.

Double Standard?

Is there a double standard held in the church (especially in the minds of male, recently returned missionaries) between how modesty standards should apply between guys and girls?

Yes, there is a trigger for me asking this.
Yesterday Curt was talking to a young guy we know who is attending college in Utah. His Halloween costume was a fro wig, and a kind of tank top known as a "wife beater". This young man is an endowed member of the church, and a tank top has no sleeves...are you getting why this doesn't add up?
Then I was looking at my home page on Facebook and I saw a picture that one of my friends from High School was tagged in. The picture album was labeled "BYU 08" and it had a picture of 6 or 7 BYU guys in their Halloween costumes. Almost half of the guys were wearing shorts that were crazy short (one pair was cutoff jeans and they were so short that the pocket lining hung out the bottom, so Britney Spears-esque). Some were also wearing vests with nothing underneath and then the tank top again reared its ugly head.
What the heck?!?
I feel safe in saying that each of these young men would have a problem with me, an endowed female member of the church donning a naughty nurse or sexy french maid Halloween costume (not that I would), but several nasty labels would be applied.
So I ask again, why the double standard. Why do they feel it's OK to be "funny" just this night.

Are the promises that they have made to be thrown away so lightly?

This bothers me, if you cannot tell.
It wouldn't even phase me if it were a group of non-mormon college guys. It's just the hypocrisy of those who have agreed, promised, covenanted, taught, and been taught better.
It makes me sad.

Because of the discussion on Proposition 8 in California and because of some friends who have declared themselves gay, I have been thinking a lot about the homosexual issue.

I have so much compassion for individuals who are challeged with this trial. It would be difficult. But, like those of us (which I this is most people) who have challenges keeping chaste outside of the bounds of marriage, I firmly believe that these trials can be overcome and that good, happy, and fulfilling lives can be led.

I have found this interview conducted between a member of church public affairs and Elder Oaks and Elder Wickman. I find it very informative.

Here is a particularly good exerpt that could serve as a summary:

PUBLIC AFFAIRS: So you are saying that homosexual feelings are controllable?
ELDER OAKS: Yes, homosexual feelings are controllable. Perhaps there is an inclination or susceptibility to such feelings that is a reality for some and not a reality for others. But out of such susceptibilities come feelings, and feelings are controllable. If we cater to the feelings, they increase the power of the temptation. If we yield to the temptation, we have committed sinful behavior. That pattern is the same for a person that covets someone else’s property and has a strong temptation to steal. It’s the same for a person that develops a taste for alcohol. It’s the same for a person that is born with a ‘short fuse,’ as we would say of a susceptibility to anger. If they let that susceptibility remain uncontrolled, it becomes a feeling of anger, and a feeling of anger can yield to behavior that is sinful and illegal.
We’re not talking about a unique challenge here. We’re talking about a common condition of mortality. We don’t understand exactly the ‘why,’ or the extent to which there are inclinations or susceptibilities and so on. But what we do know is that feelings can be controlled and behavior can be controlled. The line of sin is between the feelings and the behavior. The line of prudence is between the susceptibility and the feelings. We need to lay hold on the feelings and try to control them to keep us from getting into a circumstance that leads to sinful behavior.
ELDER WICKMAN: One of the great sophistries of our age, I think, is that merely because one has an inclination to do something, that therefore acting in accordance with that inclination is inevitable. That’s contrary to our very nature as the Lord has revealed to us. We do have the power to control our behavior.

And:

ELDER WICKMAN: There’s really no question that there is an anguish associated with the inability to marry in this life. We feel for someone that has that anguish. I feel for somebody that has that anguish. But it’s not limited to someone who has same-gender attraction.
We live in a very self-absorbed age. I guess it’s naturally human to think about my own problems as somehow greater than someone else’s. I think when any one of us begins to think that way, it might be well be to look beyond ourselves. Who am I to say that I am more handicapped, or suffering more, than someone else?
I happen to have a handicapped daughter. She’s a beautiful girl. She’ll be 27 next week. Her name is Courtney. Courtney will never marry in this life, yet she looks wistfully upon those who do. She will stand at the window of my office which overlooks the Salt Lake Temple and look at the brides and their new husbands as they’re having their pictures taken. She’s at once captivated by it and saddened because Courtney understands that will not be her experience here. Courtney didn’t ask for the circumstances into which she was born in this life, any more than somebody with same-gender attraction did. So there are lots of kinds of anguish people can have, even associated with just this matter of marriage. What we look forward to, and the great promise of the gospel, is that whatever our inclinations are here, whatever our shortcomings are here, whatever the hindrances to our enjoying a fullness of joy here, we have the Lord’s assurance for every one of us that those in due course will be removed. We just need to remain faithful.

This is how I feel...

...on gay marriage rights.

But this is organized, and already written.

Aren't I lazy.

Doing some mad linkage here...

Maybe someday I will convince you all that I have at least one original thought in my head, but right now here is another link to something I think is funny and pertinent to Prop 8.

This gal cracks me up.

Good Commentary

Oh my gosh.

This is one of the best articles ever, but I say that about most of the posts on this site.

So I'm just going to put the site in my side bar and encourage everyone to read.

Hilarious, sobering, enlightening stuff that resonates with me.

Thanks.

General Conference

Can I tell you how much I enjoy General Conference?
So far it has effectively served to inspire me to want to be less cynical.
Oh the irony. I think of myself as a very positive and happy person, but when it comes to things I write about on this blog I find the words come so much easier on topics I feel very negatively about. What flaw in my character makes the myriad of joyful topics I think about difficult to articulate and yet lets me unleash the biting words when I get angry?
I will have to ponder that a bit and then make a concerted effort to change.

Let's start with the specific things that I have loved about conference so far.
I love that the leadership in the church is reflecting the increasing diversity of the church. For an example of what I mean, we had Sister Allred (from El Salvador), Brother Aidukaitis (from Brazil), and Brother Causse (from France) all speak today.
I loved the primary chior that sang in the second session.
I love the very apparant, sincere love that the apostles have for each other and everyone else.
I love that Elder Wirthlin still gives talks even though he cannot stand and it is obviously getting hard for him to see. His talks are always some of my favorites. He has this dry humor that always has me rolling.
I am so excited for the 5 new temples that were announced, and was especially shocked/happy (along with everyone else) about the Rome, Italy temple.
I don't usually cry. I am pretty callous sometimes. But I have a soft spot for children, and the story Elder Holland told about a 7 year old boy hit me hard. Possibly because I could visualize my just-8 year old brother in a situation like that and reacting like that. At any rate, it hit a trigger and the tears flowed. Perhaps Elder Holland's delivery of the talk had something to do with it too. He is one of the best orators I've ever heard.
I love all of the additional insight and the overall desire to ponder that I feel now.

So that is my day in a nutshell. I am looking forward to tomorrow.

I was very, very wrong...

For you see, when they voted last time I thought it actually meant something.
Oops...what actually happened was these corrupt, self-serving, sorry excuses of human beings called "representatives" were just holding out until a few b.i.l.l.i.o.n. could be added for their pet special interest causes hassle free.

Well isn't that nice.

I sure hope they feel good about themselves now, defying their constituents and all. Taking the high road of "we're doing it for their own good, they just aren't smart enough to know what that is".

I am so impressed.

But then again...maybe not.

Well, I'm surprised.

Some of our representatives were listening.
Huh.
Enough to vote the proposed bailout down.

I think Lou Dobbs put into words how I feel on CNN today. He said that many people realize that by not bailing out these failing companies there will be hard, probably severe, economic times ahead; but that they feel it in their gut that the bail out is wrong.

I'm not so unreasonable as to not want some solutions and changes, I just want them to be responsible.

I think the pain may be good (yeah, check back with me in a couple months to see if I still feel this way, possibly not). If it brings about any sort of change in the direction of people living more withing their means, I will be pleased.

We'll see.

this bail out is driving me nuts

So, is this bail out bothering anyone else?
I heard an interview on NPR of one of the politicians involved in the hammering out of the details of the bail out. He admitted that almost 99 to 1 of his constituents who were calling his office were against this bail out. Strongly against.
Other cited polls have over 2/3 of the country disapproving of the bail out.

WHY ARE OUR POLITICIANS (remember, supposedly 'representing' us and our interests) BLATANTLY IGNORING US !?!

Here is a funny related post. Or it would be funny if it weren't very close to the truth.

Going green...rationally

These two articles edge into a realm slightly more liberal than my usual stances, but overall they make a lot of sense. At the very least they make you think.

Orson Scott Card is someone that I want to be more like. Not that I agree with him all (or even most) of the time, but he definitely puts thought into many different topics and does good research. Plus, he is not easily swayed by popular thoughts; I hate blind sheep who will be led hither and thither.

Interesting essay #1

Interesting essay #2

Where I fit in...

Erika took and linked to this political test and it made me curious. I was not surprised where I ended up, I like moderation in all things...but I do know that I lean somewhat to the right.
Click on the image if you would like to take the test.

Sarah Palin

As far as politicians go, I have to say that the small amount of background info that I have read on the new Republican vice presidential candidate impresses me.

She's really, really cool; and I agree with her on almost every political issue.

She makes this Republican ticket much more appealing...too bad McCain is on it, I really think he is a slime ball.

I think that Obama is a fantastic orator and he has a very presidential bearing...but I think he is very wrong about most important issues so I could never support him.

What a pickle this election has me in.

Oh boy...school is starting

I have had several thoughts as the University of Michigan is gearing up for a new school year. In the past week, campus has been abuzz with new freshmen moving into the dorms and students checking out campus. It's fun to see fresh faces and to feel the anticipation of starting anew.
But, there is another aspect of this that makes me sad. I cannot believe how much partying is going on. Below is a picture of a sign hung up for a Thursday night party. It wasn't even 6pm and just to the right of this sign there were several guys preparing by filling up tables and tables with dixie cups full of beer.

This sign is rather clever and humerous, or would be if it weren't so sad.
It screams, get pretty and come and play with us...we are your parents worst nightmare.

Another thought, I am somewhat shocked by the clothing (or lack thereof) on the girls walking around campus. Seriously, I saw a girl wearing a sheer black lace bra under one of those so-loose-and-low-that-you-should-only-wear-to-the-beach tank tops. She was literally flashing her goods to everyone walking by. Where is the self respect?

I cannot help but think that if these girls were to know their real value, potential, and divine nature they would not do the things they are doing.

At any rate, things are looking like it is shaping up to be a very interesting year!

a little tiny rant on politicians

So, I am just a little tiny bit (read: majorly) unhappy with politicians in general at the moment.

Why? you may ask.
Well, the democrats all want to be the big brother that subsidizes all the poor people and have a HUGE government entity that meddles in every aspect of life. I usually associate my ideals more with the Republicans...supposed fiscal conservatives that supposedly are for small government...but right now the Republican actions are screaming that the politicians don't actually believe in these values.

Example 1: We have seen massive fiscal irresponsibility from our Republican controlled government over the last 8 years or so.
Example 2: (this is what has me angry at the moment) The government plans to bail out certain big banks because they are (appropriately) failing because of reckless lending habits of the recent past. What the heck? If I don't want my money to go to habit poor people (i.e. lazy welfare/unemployment abusers), I even more adamantly protest tax money bailing out a company that by all rights inherent in a free market should fail. Good grief! Let them feel the painful consequences of their bad decisions. They need a reality check.

Really, the founding fathers did not (in my opinion) intend for these career politicians who have no real life skills or common sense. There is a disassociation from real life that is startling.

I may have to do something drastic like run for a public office someday to be someone who is not just a nay-sayer...but who would elect this opinionated chica?

Civic Responsibility

Just a thought.
How, in literally one or two generations, did we go from hard working people who would do without until they could afford something to the "gotta have it now" and entitlement attitudes of today?
I'm not exempt.
Even though I have had the most excellent of examples in my dad and mom, when my paid for Saturn got totaled I bought a new 4runner, a good portion of that being owed to the bank. Yeah, kicking myself for that one.
So, we're selling it and will never buy a car again without paying cash for it.

I see a lot of extreme in this attitude here in Michigan and it's driving me nuts (I'm sure, though, that it's the same all around the country). This state is in what the politicians call a one state deep recession. But you couldn't tell that by looking at the mall or restaurant parking lots. I read of people having 5, 10, 50, or hundreds of thousands of dollars in credit card debt. How can that happen? I guess we can say that many people's parents did not teach them about credit cards, but come on... there's a level of common sense that should be involved here.

Since when did cable become a necessity? $8 for a coffee? Seems like an everyday occurance for most. Saving for retirement....what's that?

I worry about the affects that the impending explosion of bankruptcies will have on this nation. I am having the impression that building up my year's supply of food storage should be high on my priority list once my house is ready for me to put stuff in. It may sound drastic....but really, the writing is on the wall; things cannot continue like they are without some serious consequences.

So, my July conclusion:
We have a civic duty to get our houses in order.

Oh, and go read Dave Ramsey's Total Money Makeover.

Pornography

I know that I've said that I'm going to do a post on this topic several times now...but I have just not been willing to pick up this heavy topic for fear of exploding my views out too angrily or harshly and taking up too much space. Pornography is something I feel strongly about and it has made a jump to the forefront of my mind for several reasons.

First off, the stuff pretty much everyone recognizes as porn...strip clubs, naked pictures, bad videos. Is it just me or has this become insanely easy to access and ridiculously accepted in main stream society?
A couple years ago I read an article about how a public college had an actual class on pornography. Not just a class talking about its affect on society, but one you actually had to see an X rated video as part of the curriculum, are you serious!?!
I currently work at a power plant. The guys I work with are rough and tumble, mainly retired navy personnel. Come to find out from everyday conversations, strip clubs are a mainstay of after work entertainment. What's even worse is that these are married men. Where's the respect? What in the world do their wives think of this?
After one of my rants one evening along the lines of the last few sentences Curt asked a female co-worker what she thought of strip clubs. She replied that she had been OK with her husband going to them all while they had been married (past tense), but then had actually gone in one with her current boyfriend and had abruptly about faced on her opinion. Curt asked why the change and her reply was that she had not realized that there was touching. My question is why would she have been OK with it either way?
College aged boys and beyond almost universally pull up inappropriate things on the internet and are expected to stay up to date on the latest issue of playboy; they would scoff at the statement that this should be abnormal.

OK, I have taken some deep breaths and I now think that I am prepared to say something in a non-emotionally charged state.

These things are wrong. Very wrong. First off, what does this behavior signify or perpetuate? For one, it distorts men's view of women until they become merely objects who exist for pure carnal pleasures sake. I think it interferes with appropriate male/female relationships on every level, from mere acquaintance to marriage partner or father. Second, I believe that viewing/participating in this kind of thing damages one's soul. It creates a rift between the person involved and any means of feeling genuine self respect.


OK, so that's my summary of how pornography affects society as a whole.
But I want to go further...I want to share my feelings on a higher law that God has set forth for true followers- a higher standard that I expect my husband, my brothers, and any member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints to follow and be held to.

Pornography is defined as the following on the church website:
"Pornography is any material depicting or describing the human body or sexual conduct in a way that arouses sexual feelings. It is distributed through many media, including magazines, books, television, movies, music, and the Internet. It is as harmful to the spirit as tobacco, alcohol, and drugs are to the body. Using pornographic material in any way is a violation of a commandment of God: "Thou shalt not . . . commit adultery . . . nor do anything like unto it" (D&C 59:6). It can lead to other serious sins. Members of the Church should avoid pornography in any form and should oppose its production, distribution, and use."

Can a magazine cover with a woman in a swimsuit be pornographic? You'd better believe it.
Are you in danger if you take this matter lightly? You had probably also better believe that.
Can a widely seen/viewed/accepted movie be pornography? Think "Wedding Crashers", I am disgusted to say that I have seen that movie. I'm sure you can think of many more.
Are many of the "funny" movies that come out today crossing the line in lewd humor? Yes.

I have found a most excellent talk entitles "Sense of the Sacred" by Elder D. Todd Christofferson. It says a lot of how I feel, but is said in a much better way than I can muster with my present writing skills. Please read it, I think your life can be enriched by its message.

Here are some other talks that I have found to be very good on the topic of pornography:

Pornography, Elder Dallin H. Oaks
A Tragic Evil Among Us, President Gordon B. Hinkley
The Sanctity of Womanhood, Elder Richard G. Scott
True to the Faith, President Gordon B. Hinkley
Blessed Are All the Pure in Heart, Elder L. Whitney Clayton

More than making me angry, this tide of sin that is washing over this world makes me bone-tired sad. I hate to see the deterioration of the family. I know that this will lead to very serious consequences in all levels of society. I hope for something better. I will teach my sons and my daughters to be better.

Money

You might wonder, why does a post on money make it onto a blog that is for spiritual thoughts?
The answer: I think they're inter-related.
I believe how you run your finances can be a reflection on how you run your spiritual life.
Are there exceptions? most definitely; but should you count yourself an exception?
Hmmm, that's shaky ground.

First Step: Debt is bad, bad, bad. Consumer debt is beyond bad. Bankruptcy is a very serious bad place indeed.
Am I perfect in having no debt? No, we are about to take on a mortgage for a new house and we have a bit to pay off on our vehicles. This is not the spot I want to be. I know better is possible and we're working hard to make it so. We have a plan in place that will make it (barring any unforeseen disruptions) so that we will not have to take out any student loans for Curt's graduate studies. We are selling my vehicle which should wipe the vehicle debt slate almost clean. We should be able to pay extra on our house periodically because we did not overly-stretch ourselves in the housing department, even when I stop working (don't hold your breath or read too much into that statement, that time is still a ways off). Other pros, we do not have any credit card debt, I was able to pay my way through school so I have no previous student loans, and we contribute a good amount to retirement accounts, and we are young so we have lots of time to eradicate debt (though I impatiently want it gone now). Overall, I can live with myself, though we are working to get into a better position.
Summary of first step: avoid consumer debt like the plague. Get out of it. After that work on mortgages and student loans, while starting on step two.

Second Step: Save for your future.
It saddens me that so many people in this world stay stuck struggling with phase one. The instability of it would give me ulcers. Like I said, we are not in our ideal situation yet, but I plan on being hard core into this phase by the time I am 30. Being prepared financially for any future = stability=security=freedom=ability to focus better on helping others because you can truly say you are on solid ground yourself (you can't help others up if you are on the same lower level).
I want to be able to serve missions (yes, that's "missions" with an "s" at the end). To do that I need to be certain that I can do that and provide for myself till the end of my days, not being a financial burden on anyone. I don't believe Social Security will be around much longer. I am seriously afraid of what taxes will increase to in the years that I live. I'm afraid that the amount of money we need to retire is something staggering, so we'd better start with as much as we can now.

I believe that part of being a good steward with the things God has given me is to become self sufficient (keep in mind, always acknowledging his hand in any success). I believe that the quality of being prepared is one God expects to see in his people, one of the things that makes him happy to behold. I do believe this is something we will be held accountable for.

I think sometimes I can come across as doom and gloom, but know this: I am a very happy person, and I am at peace with myself in this area. If this advice seems hard or overly harsh to you, know that "the guilty take the truth to be hard, for it cutteth them to the very center" (1Nephi 16:2). Know also that I am also a great believer in personal empowerment. I do not put my thoughts up here to beat people down or make people feel bad (assuming people read this, still not sure about that), I just know that you have to know true principles in your head and in your heart before you can actually live them and make improvements in your life.

I will end this post with an inspiring example of someone I know and who is someone I am trying to emulate, and then quotes from general authorities on the subject. I hope that they will be useful.

This individual I know got married in their mid twenties. He had a job as a mechanic; respectable, but definitely not in the upper echelons of the world's pay scale. He and his wife immediately started a family and had four children in quick succession. He worked hard and by the time his oldest was 6 years old he had paid for their 4 bedroom house in full and they had several vehicles that were also paid for.
Can I express my knowledge, again, that it is not how much you make but how much you spend that makes a difference.

The Miracle of Forgiveness, President Spencer W. Kimball
"Man has the moral obligation and responsibility not only of providing for himself and being a profitable servant, but also of caring and providing for his own family. 'The sluggard will not plow,' says Proverbs, 'by reason of the cold; therefore shall he beg in harvest, and have nothing.' (Proverbs 20:4). Likewise Paul: 'but if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel.' (1Timothy 5:8)"

Guide to Family Finance, Elder Marvin J Ashton
"Financial peace of mind is not determined by how much we make but is dependent upon how much we spend. "
"New attitudes and relationships toward money should be developed constantly by all couples. After all, the partnership should be full and eternal. Management of family finances should be mutual between husband and wife in an attitude of openness and trust. Control of the money by one spouse as a source of power and authority causes inequality in the marriage and is inappropriate. Conversely, if a marriage partner voluntarily removes himself or herself entirely from family financial management, that is an abdication of necessary responsibility."

Constancy amid Change, President N. Eldon Tanner
"Learn to distinguish between needs and wants. Consumer appetites are man-made. Our competitive free enterprise system produces unlimited goods and services to stimulate our desire to want more convenience and luxuries. I do not criticize the system or the availability of these goods or services. I am only concerned about our people using sound judgment in their purchases. We must learn that sacrifice is a vital part of our eternal discipline."

President Ezra Taft Benson said, “Do not leave yourself or your family unprotected against financial storms. … Build up savings.” 4

Earthly Debts, Heavenly Debts; Elder Joseph B. Wirthlin

Providing For Our Needs, Elder M. Russell Ballard
"Too many people in our country today are developing the attitude that government is obligated to care and provide for them. In many ways, government has fostered this attitude, but the members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints know better."
"Parents need to teach children very early that a solid financial base is a very important element in a happy home. We can do much with our young people to help them find satisfying, rewarding employment. We should encourage them to do well in their schoolwork and to learn to take advantage of opportunities that will help build a solid base for their future security."
"Cut expenses by distinguishing between wants and needs"

A Fortune to Share, Elder Sterling W. Sill
"Money is preserved labor, it is industry made negotiable, it is stored up accomplishment. It is the medium of exchange that we can trade for things that we can take with us and a great many of them we can actually send on ahead. We can take our families with us. We can take our education with us. We can take our great character qualities with us. And money is the medium that we can use to share the treasures of the earth with others who need our help."