The Spirit Of The Law

Neal A. Maxwell prophecy has come true

2012-02-08T19:21:00.001-07:00

In light of the recent battles over same sex marriage including the over turn of Prop 8. (again) by an appellant court, I felt it would be appropriate and powerful to see Neal A. Maxwell's words come to pass in our time.

Everyone's a libertarian... when it comes to the internet.

2012-01-24T14:09:00.000-07:00

I was noticing with the outpouring of discontent with SOPA and PIPA legislation regarding the internet, that no one wants the government involved. Everyone wants to be a libertarian when it comes to the internet.... mmm, then why not other parts of the government? Why is the internet so much better without the government involved, and why wouldn't this same mentality not move congruently to things like health care?

Some might argue that the internet is a form of expression... so is your health care. Here's how:

If I want to treat my body in such a way to only use holistic, far eastern, or even experimental treatments, that is my right as it is my body. Additionally, this same pattern of thought goes to an economic expression as holistic treatments are often less expensive or don't involve prescription drugs. It is my right to spend my money as I please when it comes to health care. If I want to follow a religious based philosophy as is practiced by the Church of Scientology... both a first amendment issue.

If life is so much greater without the government involved in the internet, why do we want the government involved in every outlet and part of the health care system, but not the internet. I am open to arguments showing how these two don't apply to each other.

In greece, pedophile gets you government assistance.

2012-01-12T18:19:00.000-07:00

Few things in politics surprise me anymore. But, when I read this article I just had to show how backwards things are in socialist greece. I think the title speaks for itself.

FINANCIALLY RUINED GREECE DECIDES PEDOPHILES QUALIFY FOR GOVERNMENT DISABILITY

Need I say more?

That's some modern day cheek turning!

2011-12-02T21:10:00.001-07:00

I was shown this article through the viral network of facebook sharing. I was glad that I took the time to read it. It is nice to see people take on the characteristics of the Savior and show the world that kindness is possible. No legislation can be as effective in making the world a better place, than the example of individual kindness and the triumph of Christ-like as was shown in this article. Please give it a read and share it with those around you. It is this example that, when mirrored the world around, will make the world the place it can and should be.

Read the article here.

Listen to the NPR story here:

Pope: Against the Death Penalty

2011-11-30T10:18:00.001-07:00

Funny how the LDS Church took tremendous heat for the whole Prop 8. thing with many saying that a church had no business in politics, and here we have a world leader of the 1st or 2nd largest religion in the world, Catholicism, making a very bold position against the Death Penalty.

It would seem that I am either obsessed over the death penalty, or that my previous post is somewhat prophetic in its topic. Either way, the death penalty has found its way into the discussion once more. The main theme of his declaration was that there is no "justice without life." I am not entirely sure how to agree with this statement as Justice would absolutely call for such a punishment. Perhaps his position would have more merit had he argued that there is no mercy without life. Even that would be called into question. What about the justice of the dead, the mercy that isn't possible anymore because of a capital offense? Why does a murderer or serial rapist deserve mercy more than the families and friends of the victim?

Many in the media tend to look at the death penalty as so unfair, some even say cruel and unusual. Throw punishment out, most of the people convicted of capital crimes have done something cruel and unusual to another, without it even being in the punishment category. If someone is to commit a capital offense, then their own death is not so "unusual" but rather a common thing. Death is something they must be comfortable with if they are to bring that on another.

Let me give an example to illustrate further: How is it justice if someone steals 10 dollars from someone that they only have to repay 5, or 6? In most cases, people would call it justice if someone stole 10 dollars that they not only had to repay the 10 dollars, but have punitive damages as well to dissuade them from doing the act in the first place. If the punishment for stealing 10 dollars is only having to repay 5 or 6 dollars, then I just made 4 or 5 dollars for doing something illegal and offensive to another.

In comparison to death penalty cases, if someone consciously murders another (takes 10 dollars to connect with the metaphor for those following along) how is it somehow justice to say that they don't have to loose their life in return? In someways justice is not served fully as there is no way to make the offense whole with additional punitive damages on top. The most that can be repaid, the offenders life, still falls short of complete justice. The real injustice is that the innocent life was initially taken, not that the offender suffers a similar fate only compounded with guilt.

Is the Death Penalty a sign of God's Love?

2011-11-28T08:52:00.001-07:00

The following quote presents an unique perspective on the death penalty as a sign of God's love, not a denial of mercy. I post it as a point of discussion to garner opinion on the perspective as a case for the death penalty as not only justice, but mercy as well. Please keep in mind the context of this commentary is on biblical law, but in response to someone questioning the validity of the death penalty of someone who has committed a capital offense.

“To deny the death penalty is to insist on life for the evil; it means that evil men are given the right to kill, kidnap, rape, and violate law and order, and their life is guaranteed against death in the process. The murderer is given the right to kill without losing his life, and the victim and potential victims are denied their right to live. Men may speak ofunconditional love, and unconditional mercy, but every act of love and mercy is conditional, because, in granting it to one man, I am affirming the conditions of his life and denying others in the process. If I am loving and merciful to a murderer, I am unloving and merciless to his present and future victims. Moreover, I am then in open contempt of God and His law, which requires no mercy to a man guilty of death.” (Rushdoony, Institutes of Biblical Law, p. 78.)"

Occupy ______ ? Are protests a dead form of speech?

2011-11-21T15:05:00.001-07:00

I have stayed pretty silent with the whole Occupy Wall Street thing that has swept the news media for sometime now simply because I don't wish to bring any attention to the protest. I don't agree with their message, or at least how they are going about it. I think protesting worked when people had no way of avoiding protests. Now days, I have an internet filled with distractions, television, books, you name it, I don't have to listen or care about that protest. It doesn't really effect me because I don't invest in stocks, I don't live near wall street, and I don't think that any financial problems that have come my way over the last few years came because some jerk got selfish in downtown New York City. The problem is much more complicated than that.

What I question are all the Occupy ___________ (enter a city here) protests that have been organized throughout the rest of the United States. I realize that the goal here is to bring the message to everyone and the only way they felt to do that was to occupy and disrupt several city operations regardless of how much they were involved in the financial situation we are in now. However, what people are seeing now are whinny, lazy, dirty people who are protesting because they are either bored, or need attention. While that may not be accurate, that is how they are coming across to many.

What is the end result going to be of these protests? So far, people have been arrested, and nothing has changed in the financial system as a result. Now what?? Well, finally I heard one partially decent idea recently to come of this, but it had nothing to do with a "hit the streets with signs" kind of protest. It was a calculated attack that would hit the banks hard (if the strategy was big enough.) It was that people were supposed to pull their money from the banks that they were protesting or the investment accounts held in the companies they felt were at fault for the financial problem. The goal was that if they were able to deplete enough of their bank reserves that the banks would both recognize their power as consumers, and that they might understand a bit of the sense of loss the people were feeling as a result. I like this idea better than being lazy and stinky for months. At least there is a clear quantifiable message to their efforts.

Then again, if these people really had no money, then I am not sure that flexing that kind of "muscle" will have any effect at all. Wether it was successful or not, I don't know. I just think that the day of the protest on the street with a sign in the air was great for hippies and anti-war protests of the 1970's is gone. I don't think it should be outlawed, and I don't think that people should stop if they feel that is the best way to get their message across. However, I feel as a society, that street protesting is a dead form of speech and most people have evolved in such a way to be able to tune out the message.

Merry Christmas is not verbal poison

2011-11-17T08:29:00.001-07:00

I was recently sent a forwarded email from my parents sharing Ben Stein's comments on the whole "Christmas culture." His comments, from the perspective of a Jewish person, encourage religious tolerance, and calls for people to understand that America is not inherently an atheist country.

For the video of his comments, watch this here. Here is the important text as verified by Snopes (as the email I got had some added content - also good, but not written by Stein)

See, following the law of chastity has benefits

2011-11-15T18:40:00.001-07:00

In case you were curious or if there was some debate out in the world, it would seem that bestiality is a bad idea, that is if you don't want penis cancer. According to a study from the Journal of Sexual Medicine and reported by the Huffington Post, men who have sex with animals are twice as likely to get penis cancer in having sex with animals than if they stick to their own kind. While the article doesn't mention it, I am sure there are several other diseases you are likely to avoid contracting as well.

So many questions that I am not sure if I want it answered:
Who volunteered for the study?
Why were men the only ones tested? (Women can have sex with animals too you know.)
Is this the most effective use of research dollars? I mean if people are having sex with animals and getting penis cancer, perhaps that is a risk they take engaging in that behavior.
Did the study focus on one animal?

Okay, I got it out of my system... I think. But it just goes to show the society we live in. We need scientific support for what morals have been teaching for years.

Julia Sweeney on letting go of God | Video on TED.com

2011-11-05T19:53:00.000-06:00

I have been watching Ted Talks on my iPhone occasionally as I find the different perspectives interesting. I came across this humorous yet thought provoking presentation from Julia Sweeney. I have no idea how the talk ends, but the presentation should be of interest to Mormons.

Julia Sweeney on letting go of God | Video on TED.com

This Mormon is for Herman Cain

2011-10-20T14:32:00.000-06:00

With multiple candidates for President being of the same LDS faith, it would seem obvious, perhaps even predictable that I would support one of them in their candidacy. True, at one point I would have felt Mitt Romney would be good for the country, but frankly, I don't know how committed he is to doing what he says based on his pseudo-democratic governorship. Jon Huntsman was a decent governor. Not amazing, but not bad. However, it seems as if his run for president has exposed some issues that cause me to give pause on wether or not he is truly conservative as he claims. Or will Jon Huntsman be much like John McCain, a fat-free republican.

So, who then do I feel would work well for this country? Herman Cain. His positions are clear, though occasionally misinterpreted. He is not a politician which makes me feel better about his potential in what I consider to be a corrupted form of capitalism.

He does not support abortion which is nice to see. He wants to fix immigration, not just claim to want to stop it. His flat tax program is probably my favorite program and the main reason I would like to see him get into office. Because of his successes and his failures as a business man, I trust that he will be able to learn from any mistakes that he makes while in office, not continue to pursue failed ideas as has our current president.

In the end I of course would encourage others to at least view his campaign materials, watch some youtube material and understand that he is well spoken, well mannered, but not interested in filling crooked campaign promises to special interests. Our country is currently derailed and I believe Herman Cain can get us back on track.

http://www.hermancain.com

What I liked about General Conference October 2011

2011-10-03T21:34:00.000-06:00

Each General Conference has points of strength, focus, and themes. One of the elements of General Conference that I took away was the level of clarity that came through from the presenters. Each speaker left little room for the liberal interpretation that is so common to the words of General Authorities. With the priesthood session of general conference, specifically with Elder Holland and President Monson, the level of clarity and direct instruction is undeniable.

Elder Holland asked a very clear question, "Who's on the Lord's side?" The context of the talk was geared towards remind each of us that we should be committed to accomplishing the Lord's work, not our own. I have found with political elections, and other social agenda's we push for issues and feel great passion about agenda's that matter very little to God. Perhaps that is why I feel comfortable with candidates like Herman Cain. When Romney and Obama are fighting over medical insurance, Herman Cain is trying to secure our nation, build our economy, and is to do so without a careers worth of political backdoor promises to fulfill. Rather than burden the people with the agenda of secret combinations, he seems to want to serve the people more than the other candidates that I have seen.

I am not saying that Herman Cain is on the Lord's side (not saying he isn't)... looking back that last paragraph seemed to jump subjects in an unintended manner. In any case, General Conference was a great lift to me personally. It was also nice to see clarification, multiple times, that the church is not an organization that is driven with the winds of social change. Morals do exist, and we are to be the Lord's standard bearers to the world on moral issues.

Why is it so hard to start a business?

2011-09-28T10:16:00.002-06:00

I am an entrepreneurially minded individual. The last I checked, we are in a down economy which means if there is a possibility of starting a business and making money and creating tax revenue, that is something that should be encouraged. In to be a legit business that means, in Utah, that means you need to register the name, the entity, get a sales tax permit, (depending on the business) permits and licensing, and then each city has a business license with its accompanying fee's and taxes.

Whatever you do, don't miss a deadline in this process because that is nightmare on top of a nightmare. But the part that stuck out to me as the cherry on top of this ridiculous "sundae" is that when I went into our city hall to file the paperwork for a home based business for the city business license they asked me, "What car do you drive?" Seriously?! What car do I drive? Why do you need to know that?

The staff were unable to give me any kind of rationale but said that planning and zoning needed to know it. My best guess than was to ascertain if my business was using a delivery vehicle, or something with obnoxious signage. Me being the smart guy that I am, I offered them my shoe size as well.

As I see it, the problem here is that if I was working for some other company with signage that was in violation of code they can't do anything about it. It is someone's personal work vehicle. So if I worked for Domino's Pizza and the sign on top of my car was larger than approved signage they aren't going to do anything about it. But if I am going to start my own business I have to open the door to them telling me what I can and can't do to run a business. The hard part of all this is that I have been freelancing doing the same business for over 7 years and nothing has come of it. Now that I am trying to be legit, to pay the city some of the taxes they don't deserve, they are going to further punish me.

As far as I am concerned this is just like illegal immigration. We make and encourage people to be illegal. We give them drivers licenses, discounts on education, health protections that they don't have to pay for, and so on. Then we have people who want to be here legally, they want to be citizens and they are denied and have to go through years worth of paperwork and costs -- essentially they make it not worth being legit. I feel the same way (on a smaller scale) and wonder why government puts up all these hurdles to people who want to be legal, legit, and to pay their fair share.

"We've got Jesus, how about you?!"

2011-09-13T14:39:00.001-06:00

I share the following not as an anti-catholic post, not at all. I just find it funny that somehow the message of Christ has eeked out into society as a message as some exclusive club?!

At a rivalry football game where the passions were as hot as the hormone level, a group of students from a catholic high school decided to alter the popular "We've got spirit, yes we do, we've go spirit, how about you?" chant to "We've got Jesus, how about you?"

Aside from being a tasteless and clear violation of the commandment to not take the name of God in vein, it does not embrace any part of Christ's message. Jesus Christ is not something to brag about, or boast in superiority about. In any case, I find the whole story one of those moments that high schoolers will probably wish they didn't experience or take part in come the 15 year reunion.

The fairness doctrine today

2011-09-09T17:00:00.003-06:00

Many don't know of the fairness doctrine in today's society, it is a current topic and issue that is worth noting. The fairness doctrine was instituted back in 1949 by the Federal Communication Commission (FCC). In that statute, broadcast stations were not only required to present controversial public topics but were required by this statute to present all sides of a controversial subject. The concept was not held very well by these stations for several reasons.

1st amendment and freedom of speech was the main infraction that brought out the controversy. The federal government was essentially telling people what they HAD to present. In typical Federal Government fashion the statute was given a deceptively soft - a warm and fuzzy title. "If everybody played fair this world would be a better place." The only way to be fair is to allow each person the same freedoms, not the same restrictions.

This video is a good presentation of how Ezra Taft Benson responded to this issue and how our current president deals with the issue. Thankfully the wording was recently removed from the FCC statute, but there are those in power today that would like to see it reinstated and strengthened. For those interested in free speech I encourage watching this, its short.

Obama admits failure as a president

2011-09-08T11:02:00.000-06:00

Short of coming out and saying that he is an economic failure of a president, Barack Obama has vocally shifted the responsibility for his mess to the GOP congress. Does that mean it is the GOP's turn to say, "we inherited this mess from our president?" I see this as a pretty clear election tactic.

Come November and the economy still sucks, Obama needs an out against his republican rivals. This is of course a gutsy move, because if things do get better under the republicans, he pretty much has his bluff called and will most likely not be president.

Both sides are being urged to put together a jobs program to help get American's back to work. Back to work? Really? Is that what the founding fathers wanting our government to be doing? To turn us into a bunch of invalid workers dependent on what the government does to make our living?

The last I checked, Obama wanted the responsibility of turning the nation around. He wanted to be the head honcho, the savior of America. Trying to shift that responsibility onto others will not alleviate the responsibility off himself. In fact, doing such will keep Obama in the picture as the president who couldn't fix things. Who's programs kept American's from working rather than letting the natural course of economic ebbs and flows take place, he played economy god. It almost reminds me of that movie Bruce Almighty. Barack Almighty... coming soon to theaters... if theaters can stay open through the end of Barack's presidency...

No Kid For You! - No parents for fat kids

2011-08-27T10:41:00.000-06:00

One of the great challenges of governance is how far the government is to mingle in the lives of its citizens. According to one Harvard professor, he believes that if a parent allows their children to get too fat, too obese, that is grounds for the government to take away the kids. The assumption is that obesity constitutes a similar risk or condition to abuse.

I originally heard about this story from ABC news with an accompanying video piece. The story is controversial because the principle is correct in that having obese children is a bad thing for the child. In some ways I would agree that obesity, when it is not medically uncontrollable due to a glandular issue etc., is a serious health problem and is bad parenting. However, I also believe that the government is walking a very dangerous line in taking kids away when perhaps there is more to the story than a cold government can regulate. Parenting is a sacred responsibility. The church does not take children away because the parents don't teach the gospel in the home. In a spiritual parallel they are very similar. Obesity is not a permanent condition and can be remedied.

No dough until there is a "no debt" plan

2011-08-26T13:52:00.001-06:00

Some businesses are taking a very powerful and notable stand with respect to the actions of the federal government. Starbucks is leading the way in saying, "We will withhold campaign contributions until a long term debt solution is reached." Wow, bravo.

Apparently hundreds of other companies and individuals are behind this effort. Perhaps we should be too.

Cool new Custom Scripture Service

2011-08-18T13:39:00.000-06:00

We don't normally do much in the way of product endorsements, but I think this new service is a really cool option for people looking to get scriptures in colors no one else has. So if you are looking for custom colored LDS editions of the standard works, check out www.customldsscriptures.com.

They even have a cool pink color for the ladies!

What video games can do to people....(uncensored)

2011-08-12T08:40:00.001-06:00

A friend of mine on Facebook sent me over this youtube video and I couldn't help but feel sorry for this guy. I don't know who he is, but it is clear to me that he is the product, let's just say prototype, of what we can expect with such a video and computer heavy culture. In a lisp riddled rant against some changes that were made to a video game, Diablo III by Blizzard Entertainment, this particular video blogger expressed his displeasure accusing the video game company of what can only be described as a violation to his civil liberties -- emotional turmoil ensues. Not since Martin Luther King Jr. has someone spoken with such passion (okay that is an overstatement).

I warn you, there is some foul language, but it won't take long, and a few clicks fast forward to get the picture. I don't feel that this man is mentally challenged, at least not to any current medical standards that I know of. However, it does seem that there is enough reason to think this guy will be able to open a new chapter in medical science history -- Video Game Attention Disorder or VGAD. (No small irony that it starts with the initials VGA.)

Here is the video, and feel free to comment on ways that the gospel might help someone like this.

Now Watch Elder Bednar's CES fireside. Tell me he isn't inspired.

When will the Fed get it?

2011-08-09T18:49:00.000-06:00

The stock market has been quite the roller coaster the last few weeks. Debt ceiling issues, poor unemployment issues, now the announcement for FREE MONEY TILL 2013!! Now I am not sure how long people feel that we can just keep interest rates at a zero percent and expect our country, our economy to survive. These rates have been so low for the last few years yet nothing is getting better. Things are getting worse. At some point people will realize what the prophets have been teaching for years. Debt is financial prison.

I think of sin as an act or thought contrary to the laws of God. Sure, we can repent of those sins, but it took a Savior to make that possible. Our country, for years now, has fought against (unsuccessfully I might add) against the laws of the economy with respect to debt. We have many "financial sins" that we the people are paying the penalty for, but who is to be our savior? Obama would like to be in that position, but he has shown repeatedly that to be impossible. Congress? Right, they are the ones that got us into this mess.

Can we the people be the saviors of our own country? Who or what can be our savior?

In order for us to receive repentance for our sins, there are certain steps that we must do in order for that repentance to be granted. One of those things is to stop doing the thing that is wrong. The FED needs to stop doing what they are doing wrong. Part of that is free money. The more free money that is put into the system the less the money we have is worth anything. At some point there needs to be a balance so that the system is not abused without reckon, but not so much that every individual is without the reasonable ability to survive. Free money is not that way. It is a Salvation for all mentality that the adversary proposed in the preexistence and is a principle of false hope.

Pelosi? Gutsy? Give me a break

2011-08-02T09:15:00.000-06:00

In checking the news today I saw the title of an article claiming that Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's actions with respect to debt ceiling legislation were "gutsy." Seeing most politicians as spineless unprincipled public leaches, I was interested how one could call a particular action as being gutsy.

After reading only the first three paragraphs I realized quite quickly that this particular writer is about as qualified to judge "gutsy" as she is to split the atom. The author tries to point out that Pelosi was not a fan of the legislation because she feels that the "working man" will bear the biggest burden for this debt resolution. Aside from the fact that the government caused the problem therefore the government should bear the burden (yet the democrats don't want spending cuts but tax increases - who pays taxes - oh yeah, the working man), the author quotes a democratic operative as saying, "“She’ll deliver as many Democratic votes as she needs to, and not one more.” Does that sound principled? Does that sound gutsy to help pass something she doesn't believe in? Where are the guts? Pelosi herself even voted for the Bill she didn't agree with - give me a break.

Later the author of this article writes, "Still, her job as leader of the president’s party is to “salute and get in line and that’s what she’s done,” says Matt Bennett with Third Way, a centrist Democratic group." Again, making the conclusion that she abandoned her principles - how is this gutsy? How is this a "stand?"What is her stand? That she is a spineless and unprincipled?

Pelosi herself is quoted in summation of just how her actions demonstrate anything but gutsy, "I’m not happy with it, but I’m proud of some of the accomplishments contained in it. And that’s why I am voting for it." Translation: I disagree with the legislation but I am voting for it anyway because "everyone else is doing it."

If Pelosi read her bible she might have read a prophecy speaking in part to people just like her. Luke 21:26 - "Men’s hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth."

Random Aside

2011-07-27T13:05:00.004-06:00

I would simply like to point out, for the sake of childish humor, that the previous post was #666.

I am not saying anything about the content or quality of the post. It is just that someone had to say it.

It has been said, now let us move past it.

That is all.

Why the gang of six plan is the best of the worst

2011-07-21T06:00:00.000-06:00

With the looming debt ceiling issue, we as a country find ourselves yet again in another "emergency." I am tired of politicians spending because of an emergency, then spending again for another emergency, now we have another emergency and it seems like the only option that is in front of us is a plan that compromises in areas we shouldn't have to, but is probably the best option that is passable at this point.

The famed "gang of six" plan is supposed to be a bipartisan plan. The claim is that by simplifying the tax codes and by eliminating some of the tax benefit some American's enjoy, the claim is that the overall tax level can be reduced. On one hand I like the tax code being simplified and that, at least in theory, the majority of americans will see the benefits instead of the select few. I like that both parties are willing to compromise but I fear that when it comes to politics, compromise means both sides lose.

I would like to be over the fact that we are even in this position as a country. But I am not sure we should be over it. It is wrong for us to even be here. Our presidents, both current and recent, have a great deal to answer for when it comes to the governing by crisis mentality. I realize that there are some downfalls to this plan. There will always be a downfall. In some ways this works toward making the nation a little more equal as there are fewer tax brackets. The higher tax rates are being reduced which can be a good thing for the economy. Perhaps what I like the most about the plan is that it simplifies an absolutely ridiculous tax code.

What if John Lennon were president?

2011-07-20T09:08:00.000-06:00

John Lennon, famous musician and political commentary, wrote a famous song called "Imagine." In this song is postulated the lyrics about a society with no religion, no money, no possessions -- no a lot of things. One of the scenarios that he tries to describe is a place with no heaven, no countries, etc. Throughout the song Lennon asks the listener to imagine a life lived in peace implying that peace is achieved by have "none" any of those things. I wonder how a life of nothing can be a fulfilling life?

I wondered if John Lennon were president today, what political party would he align with? Because John Lennon was a hippie and what many might consider a far left-ist mentality, I would almost disagree. I wonder if John isn't so far left that is almost on the hard right? No country sounds like a very limited government if not any government at all.

On the other hand he makes the argument that there is no religion, and no possessions which tends to be the position of a liberal left advocating that all things are owned by the government and produced under government dictation.

How would John Lennon handle this debt crisis? Would he hold a charity concert and donate the proceeds to the national budget? Would he like to see the government stop? While you are pondering a world where John Lennon might be president, watch the video of the song and think... was John Lennon right or wrong about the way society can achieve its goals?

Why John Dehlin is wrong.

2011-07-12T09:49:00.000-06:00

I realize that any attempt tonegatively paint an individual with broad strokes is bound anddetermined to upset if not infuriate those who support or agree withthe doctrines or principles of that individual. To make the statementthat “John Dehlin is wrong” is sure to fall into that category.What I wish to present is opinion at best and is not meant to be anexhaustive condemnation. So why compose such an article withsubsequent support if the end result is sure to bring hell fire andcontempt? Because some things are just that important to say, toclarify, to testify against.

First let me introduce John Dehlin tothose who are unfamiliar with who he is and what he is about. JohnDehlin, to the best of my knowledge, is currently a member of TheChurch of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. However, recentreports are that whatever membership that still remains is simplya formality as John has been on the path towards leaving the faithfor sometime. John is a an avid blogger and has participated in mediacoverage on Mormon's as some kind of informal representative of theChurch. Among John's blogs are Stay LDS, Mormon Stories and MormonMatters. All of these sites feature an unhealthy dose of wolf insheep's clothing type articles. Boasting the idea of creating onlineenvironments that include “A Global Community for“uncorrelated”Mormons” and with posts entitled, “UnderstandingAtheism after Mormonism” John Dehlin's deception is that this isall paths that conflict with Mormonism are a good thing, a healthything. The underlying message of his blogs are “Its good toencourage people to not agree with the church, it is good for peopleto become atheist, and then enlightened.” John's most publicflaunting of his disagreement with the church has been with the siteMormons for Marriage, another blog promoting disagreement with theChurch's position on Prop. 8 in California and voicing an opinionthat clearly opposes the official position of the Church on the issueof homosexuality. Constantly calling for church reform as if it is apolitical organization that would be better if they followed hisdoctrines.

Supporters of John Dehlin claimgratitude for how his podcasts and blogs have helped them navigatethe trial of their faith – a role I believe assigned to bishops,stake presidents, and centered in God. The reality for anoverwhelming majority is that John Dehlin helps them feel comfortablewith wanting a lack of faith in the Mormon Church. I understand thatanti-Mormonism is found all over the internet. However, mostanti-Mormon sites tend to declare themselves to be such. John feelsthat if he adds the adjective “Mormon” in front of his sites thathe represents the truths that Mormonism fosters but nothing could befurther from the truth. One can easily judge John Dehlin as an enemyof the church by his own words, but perhaps a more inconspicuousjudgement comes in studying those who agree with him. The commentaryfrom his supporters praise his Mormon fault finding and contempt forthose who are classified as True Believing Mormons or TBM's. Definingpeople as New Order Mormons (NOM's) or as TBM's is an admission ofsorts. In saying that NOM's are people who are “uncorrelated,”they are inherently and distinctly different from people who actuallybelieve the faith they belong to.

At the heart of John Dehlin's faults isone overriding misguided “search for the truth.” John takes theposition that he will find the truth through challenging the Churchof Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. His assumption is thatMormonism is incomplete if not outright wrong. In trying tounderstand why someone would take such a strong position against thechurch I considered many motivations. I realized that John has gainedpopularity as well as the recognition of the world due to his veryvocal opinions. Recently John has amassed so many followers that hehas become financially supported by them. Like Nehor in the Book ofMormon, John's false teachings will keep him on the same path.

When Christ was ministering on theearth, He encountered scribes and pharisees who also sought tochallenge his teachings. In Luke 20: 19-23 we read, “And the chiefpriests and the scribes the same hour sought to lay hands on him; andthey feared the people: for they perceived that he had spoken thisparable against them. 20 And they watched him, and sent forth spies,which should feign themselves just men, that they might take hold ofhis words, that so they might deliver him unto the power andauthority of the governor. 21And they asked him, saying, Master, weknow that thou sayest and teachest rightly, neither acceptest thouthe person of any, but teachest the way of God truly: 22 Is it lawfulfor us to give tribute unto Cæsar, or no? 23 But he perceived theircraftiness, and said unto them, Why tempt ye me?”

At other points in the New Testamentthe pharisees are described in opposition to Christ as being thosethat “loved the praise of men more than the praise of God” (John14:20) and with each time Christ perceived their minds and hearts asone seeking to deceive, not as an honest seeker of truth. I keepthinking that the mindset of one who constantly challenges Christ'schurch is similar to those who constantly challenged Christ.

God is the source of all truth. Whilewe recognize that it is through a variety of sources that we areexposed to that truth, and that occasionally those sources includingthose outside of the Church, truth is still the noblest of pursuits.President Joseph F. Smith testified, “Our hope of salvation must befounded upon the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth,for we cannot build upon error and ascend into the courts of eternaltruth and enjoy the glory and exaltation of the kingdom of our God. Ihave no fears in my heart, or mind, that that which is called"Mormonism" -- which is indeed the gospel of Jesus Christ-- will not bear the scrutiny of science and the researches of thelearned and literate into all truth. The gospel of Jesus is foundedin truth. Every principle of it is susceptible of demonstrationbeyond any just reason for contradiction. The Lord is doing his workand will do it, and no power can stay it. We believe in all truth, nomatter to what subject it may refer. We are willing to receive alltruth, from whatever source it may come; for truth will stand, truthwill endure."

If God is the source of truth, then hewould establish a church that centers on those truths. It would alsobe God's will to see that church and its members increase inknowledge and wisdom in the pursuit of the truths taught in Hischurch. Christ himself would also teach the way by which truth is tobe obtained. John Dehlin teaches that we are to contradict andchallenge the Church if we are to find truth. Christ taught, “Ifany man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether itbe of God, or whether I speak of myself.” (John 7:17) Christconstantly disagreed with and condemned the Scribes and Pharisees fortheir doubt and their desire to discredit Christ. Eventually theiranger increased to the point that they sought Christ's life allbecause they posed a threat to their power and position. John's pathmirrors those whom Christ condemned. While he does not seek the lifeof any individual, he does seek to destroy Christ's church.

Christ taught, “A good man out of thegood treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is good; and anevil man out of the evil treasure of his heart bringeth forth thatwhich is evil: for of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaketh.”Does John Dehlin do some good, perhaps. However, the overwhelming andeven obvious goals of Dehlin and his websites contradict churchteachings, promote fault finding, as well as evil speaking of theLord's anointed. The devil mixes his lies with the truth, eventeaches men his “reasonable doubt” mingled with scripture. IsJohn the Devil? No, of course not. Some will feel that these commentsare harsh, others will agree. I am not looking for either. If John isgoing to put out venom for the church that I love, if he is going tooffer ways to usher people away from the Church, or even promoteprinciples in opposition to what I consider to be the true church ofJesus Christ, then I simply offer my opinion to contract suchvitriol.

President Uchtdorf's First PresidencyMessage for July 2011 teaches about being committed to the gospel ofChrist. He wrote, “As members of The Church of Jesus Christ ofLatter-day Saints, we have committed to walk in the path ofdiscipleship. We have committed to follow the example of our Savior.Imagine how the world will be blessed and transformed for good whenall members of the Lord’s Church live up to their truepotential—converted in the depth of their souls and committed tobuilding the kingdom of God.” Does John follow the example of theSavior in the pursuit of truth? Is John converted to the Lord'sChurch? Does he seek to build up the Kingdom of God? No to all threequestions. Even if Dehlin is on the records of the church, he doesnot speak for the church, he does not represent what a church memberis to be. He is entitled to his opinion and people are entitled toagree with him. Let the world know that he does not speak for membersof the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. He represents abastardized perspective that a vast majority of church membersincluding church leadership do not endorse or share. He cunninglyleads people away from the truth and does so to gratify hisintellectual pursuits and obtain financial and social power.

Like Nehor in the book of Mormon, JohnDehlin will try to derail the work of Christ and his church.Remember, "no unhallowed hand can stop this work fromprogressing." John Dehlin is certainly no hallowed hand. He willbecome bitter and angry as does any other apostate. Such is bound tohappen as he choses to abandon his covenants. In the end, he will bea phase, his movement will loose ground. Satan will abandon him justlike he uses and abandons everyone else who follows after him.

So, how then is John Dehlin “wrong”as the title of this article asserts? He is wrong in that he is noton the Lord's side, the right side. He seeks to not be part of theLord's church and he encourages others to do the same. “Beholdthere are save two churches only; the one is the church of the Lambof God, and the other is the church of the devil; wherefore, whosobelongeth not to the church of the Lamb of God belongeth to thatgreat church, which is the mother of abominations; and she is thewhore of all the earth.” (1 Nephi 14:10) Make no mistake about it,this is where John wants to be. The church is not kicking him out, Hewants to leave the faith. But make no mistake about it, John Dehlinwill fade away. They all do.

Why do democrats want debt?

2011-07-11T11:47:00.000-06:00

The showdown countdown till Sunday's important decision on raising the debt ceiling is exposing some interesting character traits in both Republicans and Democrats. Democrats seem to be taking the line that they don't want to make significant cuts and are pushing to raise the debt ceiling. The line that both parties seem to tow is that if we don't raise the debt ceiling our country will default. The rhetoric sounds like a game of chicken to see who will jump first to cave on principle. Republicans claim to want a reduction in spending to reduce the debt, and if only for sheer principle of hating what republicans want, democrats want to fight them on that.

What I don't seem to understand why democrats want debt? Why do they want to spend so much money? In the midst of our country defaulting on our loans they are still talking about another trillion dollar stimulus and a bailout of greece as if we have that money to be spending. If I was about to default on my house I would not say, I need to go out spend more money. I would say, I need to stop spending before I lose my house. The idea of being homeless would be enough to scare me straight. With the leaders of our nation I don't feel they have such a fear. Their spending is their problem, not ours. Therefore, they need to solve the problem with their own resources and not through raising taxes. This problem is not America's problem, its is the politicians problem. Any solution that does not fix the problem on their own, without raising taxes, is to place the blame on the American People.

Church leaders constantly speak out again debt. It is a crippling institution that enslaves the debtor and empowers its creditors. The original constitution included provisions that the government was not to take on such debts. Our founding fathers understood the idea that in order to be a sovereign nation, we cannot be enslaved under the bonds of debt. Perhaps we should default so our country learns its lessons. As a person who went through a bankruptcy, I learned some powerful lessons I will never forget relating to debt and the feeling of oppression that comes with debt. Maybe the same will happen with America. 300 years ago, our founding fathers new that. Maybe this is a lesson that needs repeating every 300 years.

Natural Beauty and makeup

2011-07-06T09:39:00.000-06:00

Mormon women are not immune from the allure and drive of vanity or the pressures of superficial physical edification. One could argue that Mormon women often suffer from self-esteem issues much like the rest of the world. Without looking to blame the media or peer pressure, sufficient to say, there is a pressure, more so for women than men, to be physically attractive.

In an effort to help combat the potentially harmful emotional and even spiritual effects that this focus can bring upon an individual, this video was produced showing what a woman would look like with 365 days worth of makeup on her face. The imagery is such that the entire face of the woman is all but lost and in a strange sort of way, the woman because grotesque as a result.

Some people view their face as a canvas and the makeup as the paint. No one finds art in just the canvas, rather what is painted on the canvas. This video seeks to switch that mentality around. Each individual is the art and the beauty is simply in their creation, not in what is done with that creation.

Does this video go too far? Or is the video spot on?

July 4th, 2011

2011-07-03T21:59:00.005-06:00

A Happy Independence Day to all and sundry citizens of the United States of America!

Notice I do not say "Fourth of July." Everyone has a fourth of July. Even Great Britain.

And if you do not understand why I single out Great Britain, you are (unfortunately and sadly) in good company, with approximately 25% of the citizens of the US of A. At least according to a recent poll.

May you be safe in your revels. Try not to blow off any body parts.

May you remember not just our freedoms, rights, and gifts we enjoy as citizens, but also those who fought (and those who died) for the defense of the US of A and those freedoms, rights, and gifts. Take some time in the next 24 hours to read about those freedoms, rights, and gifts; there are plenty of places.... Pick up a copy of the Constitution and take a gander at it for a while.

May you remember who put their lives on the line some 235 years ago, committing treason to do so, and signed a document hitherto unknown in the history of our world. These brave men...these heroes.... In fact, why not take some time and learn about these heroes.

But you should not stop there. Remember the document itself. That piece of parchment that declared thirteen colonies' independence from a distant king. Join me, my LW, and the Horde as we read the words together first thing tomorrow morning. These are words, along with the Constitution, that should never be forgotten.

Never.

With a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, I pledge to these principles, my Life, my Fortune, and my sacred Honor.

Happy Independence Day.... A Happy Birthday to the Greatest Country on Earth. We may have some problems, but we are a darn sight better than the alternatives.

And as you prepare to label me a "jingoist," let me just say: go right ahead. That is your right to believe and speak as you wish.

That is all part of what we are celebrating.

The Fight For Freedom Never Ends

2011-07-03T09:48:00.000-06:00

While we remember our nations independence this 4th of July Weekend, let us not cast aside the stories of sacrifice so that this nation could exist. Freedom will only be secured as we maintain a battle against those who oppose it. May we never stop fighting to preserve the freedoms that we have. Today we are blessed because, for the most part, that battle is not being fought with guns, cannons, and bayonets. Today we must preserve liberty by fostering the principles of the Constitution of The United States and in our nations Declaration of Independence. We should seek to limit the power of government over man so that man is free to prosper, and to worship how and what they may. We should seek to make laws that do not force individuals to be or to think a certain way, but rather find ways to promote freedom and reward those who are virtuous with the responsibilities that come with these freedoms.

Oh, and one more thing... let us think to the future, specifically November 13th, 2012, as the election day when the direction of our nation will turn away from socialistic practices that compel and reduce the liberties of the individual, as a time when corrupt and immorality will be reduced, and when our next president seeks to restore the honor that comes in serving the people, not the office of president and the lobbied interests that put them there.

speechless....

2011-06-23T19:01:00.001-06:00

[Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner told the House Small Business Committee on Wednesday that the Obama administration believes taxes on small business must increase so the administration does not have to “shrink the overall size of government programs.”]

As quoted from - http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/geithner-taxes-small-business-must-rise

Playboy Club TV show not on Mormon Operated KSL NBC affiliate

2011-06-17T09:33:00.000-06:00

The upcoming TV show Playboy Club that frankly should have probably found a better home on HBO or Showtime due to the potential for inappropriate content ended up with NBC. Traditionally, most affiliates take on these national shows because they get much more advertising attention and because the mothership tends to all but force each local affiliate to do so. Not so in the case of the Salt Lake City NBC affiliate KSL.

KSL has deceided that they have the right and the ability to pass on the Playboy Club show on the grounds the show, "Promotes a brand that we just cannot support," said Mark Willes, president and chief executive officer of Deseret Media Companies (DMC)." Funny, later in the article Mark states, "I'm fairly liberal and I believe the marketplace decides, most of the time, but this is a no-brainer for me. We cannot in good conscience air a brand we don't believe in. There's a lot of creative, clever, fun entertainment out there. Let's look for that," I didn't think liberals let the market place decide anything. In any case, kudos to KSL for making a bold and appropriate decision.

In other related playboy news, Hefner is buying out the rest of the public shares of Playboy stock and taking the company private. Why is this significant? It isn't really. I just found it interesting that the Deseret News, also a part of DMC is running both stories while not claiming to promote the playboy brand. Why not, not talk about Playboy if you don't want to promote them? Just a thought guys.

Attacking a nation without it being war

2011-06-15T18:28:00.000-06:00

One of the biggest and least talked about ironies of the Obama presidency is the fact that Obama has now put America into more wars than did George W. Bush. To send troops to a nation in an attempt to take down their leader is an act of war as far as I see it. George W. Bush sent troops to take down Saddam Hussein, that was an act of war for which he was required to get congressional approval. Now that Obama is nearing the 90 days of his power he is doing what every notable evil movie villain does, they seek for a way to operate outside of their authority as a way of gaining more power till it becomes too late and no one can unseat him.

Libya has been under attack by NATO forces with the United States originally at the helm of that force. The goal, at least on the surface, is to unseat Moammar Gadhafi as the dictator head of Libya. The problem with this logic is that Obama is still using US forces in an act of war. Just because we are not leading that fight technically anymore does not mean we are not fighting it. The rationale used by the White House is that, "We're not engaged in any of the activities that typically over the years in war powers analysis is considered to constitute hostilities," one official said. "We're not engaged in sustained fighting."

What is hostilities? What is sustained fighting? Our troops are not playing penuckle with Libya. Over 90 days this is considered sustained fighting. Even by their own logic they are wrong!?! At this point, all I have to say is, Obama is about to lose a very significant lawsuit by even members of his own party. Is this act in support of Libya the beginning of the end for the Obama presidency?

For someone who campaigned heavily against the Iraq war and the lack of evidence or reason to go to war in that area, Obama is about as backwards as a president can be in attacking Libya. It reminds me of the scripture in Job 27:8, "For what is the hope of the hypocrite, though he hath gained, when God taketh away his soul?" Notice the irony of the word "HOPE" an Obama campaign trigger word.

The Book of Mormon Musical - Washington Post Article

2011-06-14T21:30:00.002-06:00

A Latter-day Saint view of Book of Mormon musical - by Michael Otterson

Reviews of “The Book of Mormon” musical have been all over the entertainment media in the past few weeks. According to the reviews, the play sketches the journey of two Mormon missionaries from their sheltered life in Salt Lake City to Uganda, where their training and life experience proves wholly inadequate to the realities of a continent plagued by poverty, AIDS, genital mutilation and other horrors. While extolling the musical for its originality, most reviewers also make reference to the play’s over-the-top blasphemous and offensive language.

Dealing with parody and satire is always a tricky thing for churches. We can easily appear thin-skinned or defensive, and churches sometimes are. A few members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints who have seen this musical and blogged about it seem to have gone out of their way to show how they can take it. That’s their choice. There’s always room for different perspectives, and we can all decide what to do with our free time.

But I’m not buying what I’m reading in the reviews. Specifically, I’m not willing to spend $200 for a ticket to be sold the idea that religion moves along oblivious to real-world problems in a kind of blissful naiveté.

Somewhere I read that the show’s creators spent seven years writing and producing “The Book of Mormon” musical. As I reflected on all that time spent parodying this particular target, I also wondered what was really going on with Mormons in Africa during those same seven years.

So I checked.

•The World Health Organization estimates that 884 million people worldwide don’t have access to clean water. This is a huge problem in Africa, not only because of water-borne diseases but because kids who spend hours each day walking to and from the nearest well to fill old gasoline cans with water cannot attend school. According to church records, in the past seven years, more than four million Africans in 17 countries have gained access to clean drinking water through Mormon humanitarian efforts to sink or rehabilitate boreholes.

•More than 34,000 physically handicapped African kids now have wheelchairs through the same Mormon-sponsored humanitarian program. To see a legless child whose knuckles have become calloused through walking on his hands lifted into a wheelchair may be the best way to fully understand the liberation this brings.

•Millions of children, meanwhile, have now been vaccinated against killer diseases like measles as the church has sponsored or assisted with projects in 22 African countries.

•More than 126,000 Africans have had their sight restored or improved through Mormon partnership with African eye care professionals in providing training, equipment and supplies.

•Another 52,000 Africans have been trained to help newborns who otherwise would never take a first breath. Training in neonatal resuscitation has also been a big project for Mormons in Africa.

•Then, of course, there is the tragedy of AIDS. A couple of weeks ago I attended a dinner where the Utah AIDS Foundation honored James O. Mason, former United States Assistant Secretary of Health. When he was working for the Center for Disease Control in 1984, a project to research the epidemiology and treatment of AIDS was established at the Hospital Mama Yempo in Kinshasha, Zaire. After visiting the hospital and examining the children and adults with AIDS, Mason described the death rate and the associated infections from AIDS as “horrific.” Mason, a Mormon, knows quite a bit about AIDS and a great deal about Africa.

•None of this includes responses to multiple disasters, like the flooding in @#!*% , where the Church provided clothing, quits and hygiene items to 20,000 people in six inundated regions of the country.

Of course, parody isn’t reality, and it’s the very distortion that makes it appealing and often funny. The danger is not when people laugh but when they take it seriously – if they leave a theater believing that Mormons really do live in some kind of a surreal world of self-deception and illusion.

A couple of weeks ago a review about the musical appeared at the New York Times from a Jewish writer who simply listed himself as Levi. “As someone of Jewish faith,” he began, “I take personal offense at this show….I cannot believe that New York, MY New York, where I was born and raised, would ever do such a thing. Shame on you, New York Times, shame on Broadway, and shame on all of us who stand idly by and do nothing while the faith of others is mocked. Religious and cultural Jews need not support such bigotry.”

Levi’s point was echoed by some reviewers, but by surprisingly few. So why hasn’t there been a huge outcry from Mormons?

In my opinion, three reasons. The first is that in the great scheme of things, what Broadway does with “The Book of Mormon” musical is irrelevant to most of us. In the great sweep of history, parodies and TV dramas are blips on the radar screen that come and go. Popular culture will be whatever it will be.

The second reason is related. Jesus’s apostle Paul put it rather well when he said that Christians seek out the positive and virtuous things in life. His New Testament phraseology was adapted in the early years of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in this formal Article of Faith:

“We believe in being honest, true, chaste, benevolent, virtuous, and in doing good to all men…If there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, we seek after these things.”

Finally, if we Mormons really do follow Jesus Christ in our lives and look to him as an example, then it’s hard for us to ignore the injunction to turn the other cheek. There were times, to be sure, when Jesus roundly criticized others, but it was almost always for hardened hypocrisy. He dismissed the criticism he received personally and told his followers: “Do good to them who despitefully use you and persecute you.”

It takes strength of character to do this, but it’s the Christian mandate. Sure, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints pushes back when the record needs correcting or when legal rights need defending, but the world of popular entertainment is more likely to be met with a collective shrug than by placard-waving Mormon protesters.

Meanwhile, what of those thousands of remarkable and selfless Mormon missionaries who opted to pay their own expenses during the past seven years to serve in Africa while their peers were focused on careers or getting on with life? They have returned home, bringing with them a connection with the African people that will last a lifetime. Many will keep up their Swahili language or their Igbo dialect. They will keep in their bedrooms the flags of the nations where they served. They will look up every time they hear Africa mentioned on the evening news. Their associations with the people whose lives they touched will become lifetime friendships. And in a hundred ways they will become unofficial ambassadors for the nations they served

Weiner shows his wiener.

2011-06-06T22:57:00.000-06:00

Politicians never seem to amaze now days with the depth of their lewd acts. This is not a republican vs. democrat kind of thing, but it is a politician, men in power kind of thing. With Rep. Weiner and his twitter photo fiasco, it would seem that insult added to injury, added to deception in marital encounters, and so on. All for what? To send a picture of his "special parts" to other women online. Wow, that does sound worth it.

After admitting to his actions and his lies we now know that Rep. Weiner is pervert, a liar, a cheat, and not endowed (that has a double meaning to LDS members of the church). But he is not alone. In fact, a recent article that was written in Time Magazine referring to Arnold Schwarzenegger, his doucheness Jon Edwards, and other politicians who behave badly. The article is a little like shooting fish in a barrel, but is worth a read if you have the time.

We all have our moments of weakness. That is to be expected. However, there is an unavoidable concentration of men in public office exemplifying the weakest moral character. It would seem that the fulfillment of 2 Timothy 3:2-6 is coming to pass in perhaps a way not previously considered. Read the following passages in consideration of Rep. Weiner, and others.

"2For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,

3Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,

4 Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;

5Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.

6 For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts.

Unbalance of power

2011-06-06T10:48:00.001-06:00

The founding fathers established a system of government with checks and balances so that no one aspect of the government had unrestrained power. Legislative, judicial and executive, all have veto power over the other. That has since changed quite a bit.

Which aspect or branch has grown? Which, if any, have diminished? If you were to rank the most powerful of all three, which would it be and how did it come to be that way?

The more I think about it, the collusion between the executive and legislative branch has blurred the lines in their roles. Congress brigs bills that the president wants to see, not the people. The president vetos or approves whatever they please. The judicial branch is stocked with the activists that fit the needs of the president. If I were to find a great offense to the constitution as it relates to the way government operates today is the imbalance of these three branches. The idea that a president has risen to a kingly position dishonors the lives of those who fought in war against Great Britain and it's king. In sweeping fashion we are seeing a society similar to the Children of Egypt, or the Nephites who, perhaps unknowingly or unwittingly, have put a king in place when it was not to be so. A king who makes principles of godliness an offense and the ideals of a sinful life "accepted."

The world of learning

2011-06-01T10:56:00.001-06:00

After 10 years or so an break from formal education I finished my bachelors degree. As a self employed individual, a degree in the paper sense does me little. My clients NEVER ask me if I have a degree. They are more interested in what I do, the price I give and how fast the work can be done, than the degree, etc. So why did I spend thousands getting a degree.

One would like to assume that the education is the real goal. For me that was part of the goal. In that I accomplished learning a great deal in a formal education sense. But the paper diploma meant to me that regardless of why I say I know, an outside institution accredits that I do know what I say I know. In that regard the institution has certified that I have learned to a certain level.

With that being said, the degree means more to a self employed individual than originally considered. Just because people don't ask about my degree doesn't mean that it can't be part of sales pitch. I am worth working with because of the value I bring due in part to my unique blend of education and experience.

Financial benefits aside, the other reason I pursued my degree was because the Prophets and Apostles have stated that our education is of great value. In some language, continual education is a commandment. Obedience to Commandments come with blessings.

I can say that education, even in a broken or disjointed system, is of great value. It is convenient to harp on public education or other aspects of the formal education process, but even such mediocrity can be an education of it's own. It is through our mistakes here in mortality that we often learn the most poignant lessons. In fact, one could argue that because the plan of salvation is to not simply be perfected, but to be perfected through mediocrity, mistake, and to rise above these challenges, each individual can rejoice in the inferiority of their surroundings as much as they can their successes as those things which are now inferior, are just future successes as we persevere in the pursuit of excellence.

Education is a noble pursuit in it's variety of forms. Getting a degree still has value if you are willing to see it for what it can mean or imply in the sense of accomplishment and achievement. Ultimately wether formal or "real world," education holds an exalting value in this world and in the world to come and is therefore a nil e pursuit in all it's forms.

John Welch: Thy Mind, O Man, Must Stretch

2011-05-29T16:33:00.002-06:00

I wish to sit here and list all the different things that I liked about John W. Welch's presentation recently aired on BYUTV, instead, I will just post the video and strongly suggest you give an hour of your day to this presentation. One of my favorite subjects is his section on freedom as not just the ability to do what one wants, but that true freedom is the ability to do what we ought.

Originally given May 17, 2011, this presentation is entitled, "Thy Mind, O Man, Must Stretch." Enjoy, I know you will.

Jenkem: A Sign the Second Coming is near....

2011-05-28T10:51:00.000-06:00

Traveling the AM radio dial through the variety of talk radio programming can often be enlightening. As for this Saturday, this was no exception. I came across a piece done on the ManCow Radio Program that talked about Jenkem. For those that don't know, Jenkem is a "drug" that surfaced around the 1990's.

Jenkem, also known as human waste drug, or "Butt Hash," is a supposed to be a hallucinogenic drug made primarily from fermented human waste. Yes, I said, human waste. Initially considered to be an internet hoax, news reports have started surfacing that individuals have actually tried the idea.

In case you don't believe me, here is a news story on the subject. It both explains the way the news was presented, and the way that people dismissed it:For those that watched the story you might find some interesting things presented. While the story itself says that there is a hoax to the original story, there are those who have actually gone out and tried Jenkem!!!! Now, I realize that Jenkem is not widely used, and is certainly something reserved for the unbelievably slow. However, I am depressed to think that anyone gave this a try, and I am even more saddened that the news bought it. In any case, the idea of a drug called "Butt Hash" is still quite amusing to my sometimes immature mind.

The honor of abortion?

2011-05-26T13:11:00.000-06:00

In a recent article, entertainer Chelsea Handler admitted to having an abortion when she was 16 years old. While some of her fans were disappointed with this information, I was more disappointed in the rationale and reasoning that was given for the abortion, and the sense of honor and dignity she was attempting to give to her decision.

In the article Handler is quoted as saying, "I had an abortion when I was 16. Because that's what I should have done. Otherwise I would now have a 20-year-old kid. Those are things that people shouldn't be dishonest about." There is so much here to hold issue with, where do I begin...first of all the abortion.

Baring any evidence or claim that she was molested (which she wasn't, at least not any resulting in this pregnancy), or that it was incest (which it was also not), then the abortion is a violation against nature, against God and his laws and principles, and therefore should be morally equal to coming out and saying 'I killed my newborn baby because I didn't want it.'

Second, she claims that having an abortion is something she should have done. As if she was being morally compelled to do the "right thing" or that the decision somehow made rational sense to do so. Lets assume that there is a rational reason for such a thing...what was her claim of rationale - because she would now have a 20 year old kid....I'm waiting for the rationale.

So what if you would have had a 20 year old kid?! People grow up, that is not a crime against nature. That is the natural process of life. Then, as if to hold claim to some moral accomplishment in her acts, she said that this is not something to be dishonest about. This statement not only implies that there are things that you should lie about, but that somehow honesty trumps murder in the moral grand scheme of things.

Bravo Chelsea Handler. I didn't think you could produce any further reasons for me to not like you or your show, but you went ahead and did it anyway. The only bonus that can come from such an experience is the hope that you will have fewer fans to influence in the future.

Obama got SCHOOLED!!!

2011-05-20T14:05:00.002-06:00

Wow, today's speech with Netanyahu was a shocker! What? You mean the leader of Isreal isn't going to pander and bow to the "annointed one" Barack Hussein Obama. What an embarrassment to have the leader of America pander to Palestine and command Isreal to make concessions.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Obama is a fool. He doesn't understand the realities of the world, and it was shocking to see him try to appease the Arab world by telling Isreal to make concessions with Hamas and revert to their 1967 borders - and even more shocking and satisfying was Netanyahu basically telling Obama to go to hell (politely of course).

More Mormon Nudists... again

2011-05-20T09:58:00.000-06:00

Last night on the local CBS news affiliate in Salt Lake City, a story about our most favorite subject here at the Spirit of The Law Blog (should comment count be any indicator of favoritism); Mormon Nudists, or Naturists.

Since the local affiliate does not have an embed feature on their video player I will simply share the link to the page with the story here.

A few interesting points were brought out in the story that were either unintentional, or just simply a revealing part of the practice itself. In the story was "featured" a man who claimed to be a high priest and in the bishopric of a ward. His interview was with the usual blacked out silhouette and the voice was altered to protect identity. The irony is that the reporter quotes this individual as one who will challenge anyone who questions his lifestyle. Right, that is why he is hiding and living a secret double life. Does that sound like a challenge? Or does that sound like running away?

The piece also showed, full face, two gentlemen that have left the faith as a result of the conflict between the church and nudism. When push came to shove, these men preferred being naked to their faith. One might argue that these are men that are just following what they believe. I don't deny that, but what is it that they believe? From my perspective these men have demonstrated the true hypocrisy of their position.

It is the claim that being naked does not have to be sexual. They also claim that they can be closer to god by being naked. While I believe neither of these claims to be truth, I simply ask, where is the commandment to do such a thing? Did god ever say, thou shalt be naked? Was not Jesus Christ the way the truth and the life to be brought unto the Father, not nudity? I find their position to be inherently selfish as the act gratifies their own base desires. While Christ "went about doing good" these individuals chose to pollute the fountains of living water by engaging in a practice that to their own admission "did not feel right."

I say to each his own as far as the things of this world. But when it comes to the Church, to our membership, and the sanctity of our temple bodies, there is simply no excuse for such behavior.

What are you doing for your rapture party?

2011-05-18T19:20:00.000-06:00

So, some evangelical Christian came out and said that the end of the world, or the second coming of Christ, often referred to as the "rapture" will be in three days; May 21st. In response to this the worlds atheists are planing to have some rapture parties.

Sure this is just another excuse to party, and it kills the second bird by pissing off believing christians, but it actually is a pretty neat idea. Think about it: Option 1 - The Rapture happens and the end of the world drama unfolds, why not go out with a bang. Option 2 - The Rapture doesn't happen and they get to celebrate one more religion that will slowly crumble to the ground as the false prophets lies are exposed. Either way, a party works.

It reminds me of the post we did a while back about the email service called You've Been Left Behind. This is a site offering a service to have pre-programed emails sent to a predetermined list of recipients in the event that you are taken up in the rapture.... after all, if you are gone, who is going to be there to tell all the sinners where you went? In case you want to know the specifics, here is how the website offers this service:

We have set up a system to send documents by the email, to the addresses you provide, 6 days after the "Rapture" of the Church. This occurs when 3 of our 5 team members scattered around the U.S fail to log in over a 3 day period. Another 3 days are given to fail safe any false triggering of the system."

Seeing as this service might come in handy in the next three days, now would be the time to sign up... before its too late.

Hypocritical Moment of the week: Mike Huckabee

2011-05-18T00:02:00.001-06:00

I don't always agree with Jon Stewart on the Daily Show, but there does seem like a big dose of hypocrisy happening over at Fox News and Mike Huckabee. As a self-proclaimed pastor/evangelist, Mike Huckabee, a "follower of Christ," it does seem strange to on one hand play bass guitar with Ted Nuggent, performing a song with extremely immoral lyrics, then to turn around and say that you are not running for president because of your dedication to Jesus Christ.

For those of you interested in the segment from the show, you can watch it below:

Then I think of all the nasty things that Mike Huckabee has said in the past about Mormons and I have to say that I am glad he is not running for President. The strangest part of all this is that he presents so many others as crazy nut jobs, but somehow he finds the time to speak as a "follower of Christ" while in the same show rocking out to a song about sex, with a gun crazed, extremist in Ted Nuggent who screams for the president to sit on his guns and for the secretary of state to have sexual relations with a machine gun. Not exactly the type of guest worthy of bringing on your show with the introductory endorsement that Ted Nuggent was given.

I may not agree with the things that Mike Huckabee disagrees with, but that doesn't make Huckabee right in his reasoning or his actions. In fact, I find his actions to be hypocritical at best.

That lady got class.

2011-05-09T20:19:00.001-06:00

‘Burn a Bush’? Michelle Obama invites rapper Common to a poetry reading

First Lady Michelle Obama has scheduled a poetry evening for Wednesday, and she’s invited several poets, including a successful Chicago poet and rapper, Lonnie Rashid Lynn, Jr., AKA “Common.” However, Lynn is quite controversial, in part because his poetry includes threats to shoot police and at least one passage calling for the “burn[ing]” of then-President George W. Bush.

Back in 2003, First Lady Laura Bush held a poetry evening, and she invited several poets to reprise the work of Emily Dickinson, Langston Hughes and Walt Whitman. Although none of those poets had urged violence against a president, Bush canceled the event after left-of-center poets protested and threatened to disrupt the event.

Here’s a sample of Dickinson’s work that could have been presented at Bush’s event:

I’m nobody! Who are you?

I’m nobody! Who are you?

Are you nobody, too?

Then there’s a pair of us — don’t tell!

They’d banish us, you know.

How dreary to be somebody!

How public, like a frog

To tell your name the livelong day

To an admiring bog!

Here’s a sample of Common’s work, transcribed from a 2007 video with 837,613 viewers on YouTube. Students, please compare and contrast the two poems. You’ll get extra credit for counting the death threats. There is no extra credit for identifying spelling errors. By the way, ‘Uzi’ is slang for a compact machine gun:

A Letter to the Law

Dem boy wanna talk… [indistinguishable]

Whatcha gon do if ya got one gun?

I sing a song for the hero unsung

with faces on the mural of the revolution

No looking back cos’ in back is what’s done

Tell the preacher, god got more than one son

Tell the law, my Uzi weighs a ton

I walk like a warrior,

from them I won’t run

On the streets, they try to beat us like a drum

In Cincinnati, another brother hung

A guinea won’t see the sun

with his family stung

They want us to hold justice

but you handed me none

The same they did to Kobe and Michael Jackson

make them the main attraction

Turn around and attack them

Black gem in the rough

You’re rugged enough

Use your mind and nine-power, get the government touch

Them boys chat-chat on how him pop gun

I got the black strap to make the cops run

They watching me, I’m watching them

Them dick boys got a lock of cock in them

My people on the block got a lot of pok* in them

and when we roll together

we be rocking them to sleep

No time for that, because there’s things to be done

Stay true to what I do so the youth dream come

from project building

Seeing a fiend being hung

With that happening, why they messing with Saddam?

Burn a Bush cos’ for peace he no push no button

Killing over oil and grease

no weapons of destruction

How can we follow a leader when this a corrupt one

The government’s a g-unit and they might buck young black people

Black people In the urban area one

I hold up a peace sign, but I carry a gun.

Peace, ya’ll.”

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2011/05/09/burn-a-bush-michelle-obama-invites-rapper-common-to-a-poetry-reading/#ixzz1LubfWVoy

High Five for an inspired man!

2011-05-08T10:14:00.003-06:00

"I mourn the loss of thousands of precious lives, but I will not rejoice in the death of one, not even an enemy. Returning hate for hate multiplies hate, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness: only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate: only love can do that." - Martin Luther King, Jr.

In addition I'd like to add that Obama is no MLK no matter how much he attempts to position himself as such -

"There was a time when the church was very powerful in the time when the early Christians rejoiced at being deemed worthy to suffer for what they believed. In those days the church was not merely a thermometer that recorded the ideas and principles of popular opinion; it was a thermostat that transformed the mores of society. Whenever the early Christians entered a town, the people in power became disturbed and immediately sought to convict the Christians for being "disturbers of the peace" and outside agitators. But the Christians pressed on in the conviction that they were "a colony of heaven" called to obey God rather than man. Small in number they were big in commitment. They were too God-intoxicated to be "astronomically intimidated." By their effort and example they brought an end to such ancient evils as infanticide."

Obama supports abortion, partial birth abortion, and supported infanticide in Illinois as a state senator.

Torture - making the best of a bad thing?

2011-05-05T10:20:00.000-06:00

Some have claimed that intelligence used to find and eventually kill Osama Bin Laden came from GTMO and the torture of detainees. There is not claim that I am aware of that this version of torture was the "enhanced" or water-board version of torture that has caught so much attention in recent years, but torture/interrogation techniques brought forth the information. I was under the impression that such was not the case, but nevertheless, what if torture were used? Does the end justify the means in this case?

One article sates that torture in any form is morally repugnant. Then again, so is terrorism, which is worse? Often times the choices we make in this life can be between two bad or difficult choices. Conversely, as Elder Oaks states, "As we consider various choices, we should remember that it is not enough that something is good. Other choices are better, and still others are best. Even though a particular choice is more costly, its far greater value may make it the best choice of all."

Each choice carries a weight of both negative and positive consequences. In the "agency scale" of torture to terrorism, is there a good choice? A Better Choice? A Best Choice? If so, what are those choices?

He's dead - Bin Laden is dead...can we forgive him?

2011-05-02T11:08:00.000-06:00

Most of the world has heard by now that Barack Obama has announced the death of Osama Bin Laden, most wanted terrorist for over 9 years. Many took to the street in celebration of the announcement of his death. I even found myself relieved, if not somewhat happy at the news.

I realize that there is justice coming his way from our Heavenly Father, but I could not push aside the idea that Christ died and suffered for Bin Laden's acts too. That somewhere, deep down, I should understand that Osama Bin Laden is my brother, and that Jesus Christ and Heavenly Father love still love him. I would imagine they are deeply disappointed, but there is still love in their souls.

I see that love from God and His Son, and I recognize the celebrations around the world at his death, and I observe a huge gap in behavior and response. Understandable, as I said, I myself was borderline ready to set off fireworks at the news. Perhaps this is just another moment in life where I can see, not just in my life, but in the society in which we live, where we are at spiritually as a people that we find closure in death for those whom we want such justice. Yet we are also so afraid of that justice in our own lives. We sometimes fear death for fear of what justice might come upon ourselves while simultaneously wanting that punishment on others.

Doctrine and Covenants 64:9-10 reads, "Wherefore, I say unto you, that ye ought to forgive one another; for he that forgiveth not his brother his trespasses standeth condemned before the Lord; for there remaineth in him the greater sin. I, the Lord, will forgive whom I will forgive, but of you it is required to forgive all men."

Now the real question is, can we forgive Osama Bin Laden because if not, greater sin lies within each of us. That is a huge heaping pile of sin that I cannot support.

He's alive!!!!

2011-04-27T09:27:00.002-06:00

So, the big news is that Barack Obama finally was able to produce a birth document from Hawaii. The irony of the whole thing is that he said that, "We do not have time for this kind of silliness." Really?! So you have the time to make your NCAA final four predictions, you have time to pick out a dog, but you don't have time to produce the document supporting your legal legitimacy to be President of one of the most powerful nations on the planet?!!

Give me a break Obama!!!!

People get their birth certificates all the time in much faster than two years+!!!! No wonder we aren't out of Afghanistan yet! It took him over two years to get a birth certificate!

In case you want to hear his official position on the issue here is the transcript. Of course the most recent individual to address this issue is presidential hopeful, Donald Trump, who came out strongly. The reality is that Obama is full lies on this issue. How do I know this? For one, In the above linked transcript of the press release he claims that many people have signed affidavits to the effect that the birth certificate is real and it exists. However, if you see for yourself, the date on the stamped and submitted certificate to the media is dated April 25, 2011. So, no matter what you claim other people saw, they did not see this same document that was submitted two days ago.

Who is to say that this wasn't forged?! Seriously, two years people. If the document is real, it is more a confirmation, no, a declaration, that Barack Obama is bar far one of the most in competent individuals to ever set foot in the White House. It should not take the President of all people, this long to produce something that people have questioned for so long. Who let him take the oath of office without seeing this? Why were so many of his loyal supporters so willing to side step such a clear legal prerequisite? Does the law not matter anymore? In a time when terrorism is at its peak, we need to be MORE vigilant, not less, on such simple issues.

(Plus did anyone else know that african was a race? - see his birth fathers information)

Thinking Aloud: Dr. Hadley Arkes

2011-04-26T08:07:00.000-06:00

In my daily travels yesterday I came across the radio program on BYU's Classical 89 station. During the day is a half-hour program where a variety of topics and guests come on to discuss different topics ranging from religion to politics. This is not hype talk radio like Rush Limbaugh or Glenn Beck. The issues are discussed, dare I say, academically.

Yesterday's program featured Dr. Hadley Arkes, the Edward Ney Professor of American Institutions at Amherst College, who was asked about Abraham Lincoln as a "Founding Father," his own faith, moral truth, and reason. I was deeply impressed by the ability of Dr. Hadley Arkes to share very reasonable approaches to many issues both politically and constitutionally. He approaches the topics of liberalism, abortion, and even goes so far as to talk about the ability of individuals to balance reason and religion as it relates to Mormon Theology and other faiths.

I was so impressed with the program that I wanted to share it with you all. So here is a link (click here) to listen to this episode. Dr. Arkes has written a few books which I am interested in finding. If you are interested in more information on Dr. Hadley Arkes, click here.

Where have all the good Mormon's gone?

2011-04-21T21:26:00.001-06:00

"And in ^athat day shall be heard of ^bwars and rumors of wars, and the whole earth shall be in commotion, and men’s hearts shall ^cfail them, and they shall say that Christ ^ddelayeth his coming until the end of the earth." D&C 45:26

While on a flight to Long Beach, CA on JetBlue, I watched one of the complimentary video presentations that play as the plane first takes flight. This particular set of programming was centered on broadway and some of the theatrical shows currently playing. As the shows ticked by and various actors and producers were interviewed, lo and behold who should I see but actor Will Swenson. (See picture below)

Some in the LDS world may have seen Will in such movies as Singles Ward, Singles Ward 2, the RM, and the Sons of Provo flick. Now the world knows him as Tony Award Nominated Will Swenson, star of "Hair" on Broadway. For those unaware of why this is significant, Hair is as strong a piece celebrating moral counter culture and includes a nude scene, a rare thing in popular theater. Most of Will's entries in the world of IMDB and Wikipedia make clear that he no longer practices his Mormon faith.

Then on TV the other day I noticed actor K.C. Klyde following in the footsteps of fellow Mormon actor, Kirby Heyborne, who at one point appeared in multiple beer commercials. KC has appeared in "The Best Two Years" and "Christmas Angel" and has appeared on a very highly visible Super Bowl Commercial for Budweiser. While on a much better position than Will Swenson as far as church standing, I wonder at what point on the road to success that Kirby and KC chose to support beer commercials?

I suppose I am being a bit harsh, but at the same time, what moral position can we as a people keep in the world if some of our most public faces chose to abandon their beliefs for "a good gig?"

How to be: President Monson @ April Priesthood Session 2011

2011-04-17T23:15:00.000-06:00

Last night before going to bed I took the time to watch President Thomas S. Monson's sermon from the April 2011 Priesthood Session of General Conference. I don't generally consider Pres. Monson the type of individual to speak strongly on social issues as they relate to doctrines. However, since becoming president of the Church, either by nature of his calling, or because that is what the Lord has inspired him to share, President Monson has become stronger and clearer in his language.

Some of the points that stuck out to me include the portions where Pres. Monson reflects on how there seems to be a greater divide between the values and morals of the church and the values and morals in society. At a point in his earlier life, President Monson said that these standards often overlapped or were congruent. Today, that has changed.

Today the priesthood is more needed now than ever. To hear his presentation confirms his position as Prophet and mouthpiece of the Lord on the earth, but his advice is practical if we are to find happiness in a society and world that will continue to deteriorate. I encourage you to give this presentation a good viewing if not a second viewing.

Here is the full video of his sermon:

Addiction is a choice

2011-04-12T13:56:00.000-06:00

I have battled with the concept of agency this last week as I have had to deal with my sister entering yet again, the judicial system of this great land. Upon my first visits and in talking with her repeatedly on the phone from her cell pod, I came to realize that at some point the choices that lead up to addiction as well as the impact that drugs and gangs can have on what would otherwise seem to be innocent bystanders.

My sister has been inactive and into drugs and gangs now for over half of her life. Seeing as she is only 26 years old such a statistic paints only a portion of the challenges that have faced our family for years. From right before the time I left for the mission field to the time I came home my sister only lived at home for a period of 4 months total. During my two years mission she was arrested 4 times or had run away from home multiple times. A majority of her actions while I was away were kept from me at the request of my parents hoping to keep my mind on the work and not on "sister issues" that were out of my sphere of influence.

Years have gone by and other incarcerations have continued as well as a brief 8-9 month stint in a "troubled individual" facility in southern Utah. Today we are now faced with yet another bout with addiction and incarceration. Most who have known her from a child have maintained the line, "this is not who she really is, she is a better person than this." While I agree that this is the case with most people, I have been powerfully challenged in this thinking as of late. At what point does someone's acts truly define who they are; not their potential, but who they are?

I believe addiction is a choice. People chose to become addicted by the very nature of the activities they chose to engage in. I also believe that addiction is something that people can overcome. People can change should the chose to. People say addiction is a sickness. I suppose there is some merit to this except many people have sicknesses that they did not chose to have. Sometimes people just get cancer, or they get a cold, etc. Addiction doesn't happen by accident. I realize that addiction is difficult. In fact, during my time at LDS Family Services as a service missionary I came to have a love and respect for those who are choosing to overcome their addictions. They are some of the strongest people I have met. I do not envy these tests in life.

During my jail visits I can't help but have the scripture enter my head time and time; its from John 8:32, "And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." One of the aspects of addiction that so strongly echo's the influence of the adversary, Satan, is the idea that addiction isn't a choice, that this is something you have no control over, and that you were never going to become addicted in the first place. These lies are what keep people in addiction. A different set of lies are what got them there.

With so many addicts ending up homeless, jobless, and without family relations because of drugs, it is no wonder that we also find some of the greatest, most noble individuals among their ranks. The elect of God are the ones that are the greatest challenge to the work of the adversary and so they also tend to be challenged with his most entrapping tools. May we not forget to pray for those in addiction of whatever kind. Even though addiction is still a choice, we all still have a responsibility to help one another to over come these tremendous challenges.

Ride the Lightning

2011-03-31T14:46:00.006-06:00

This makes me so happy to see. The upcoming documentary touches upon one of the very root causes of so many societal problems - fatherlessness. I commend James Hetfield for being brave with this, but that is something I have admired about him for awhile now. Here is a man who has lifted himself up from bottoming out in the gutter of addiction and squalor to becoming quite a respectable family man and mentor (who still knows better than ever how to shred the guitar neck and wail like a banshee on the mic!).

Though he likely doesnt know it, Hetfield is testifying of the truth taught by Brother David, President McKay who said that "no success in life will compensate for failure in the home". I have admired watching him be so honest with the public and the music community he comes from about changes he has made to his life that he feels are right, as it cannot be easy, preaching sobriety, charitable giving and the family life to an audience you still hope will financially support you through your music performances and recordings.

In my judgement, he has shown himself in his mature adult years to be a high caliber human being (this clip is just a slice of what I refer to) and I have good expectations of what the future may bear out for him. People in his position can make a strong impact when they testify of essential gospel truths to audiences that desperately need to hear it, and that is what James Hetfield is doing, even if he doesnt fully realize it yet. Fatherhood is a sacred duty and key to our honor as men.

For completely reinventing his life without abandoning the God-given talent to entertain musically, and for moving gradually towards truth and standing up for it in a most public way, my hat is off to Brother James!

Whoa! Whoa!

2011-03-30T17:02:00.002-06:00

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/obama-2002-toppling-brutal-dictator-dumb

http://www.gazette.com/articles/springs-115381-colorado-obama.html

Ok.... so the first article is about how Obama said toppling a brutal dictator is a "dumb" war. I don't remember if I posted on here or not about my thoughts of the conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq, after having personally spent some time there. But conspiratorily, I think that contracting companies have so much money at stake that when they see one conflict spooling down, they gotta keep that industry pumping by stirring up another pot... case in point Libya.

The second article is about a retired AF colonel who... well here's the hard part, I can't tell if the story is about proof that Obama is an illegitimate president (kind of hard to tell because it's buried among details of how the information was obtained illegally), but anyways, wouldn't one think that proof that a President is illegitimate be a more important story than how someone obtained the proof?

We live in a sick and twisted, and corrupt world. Nothing to do about it but continue striving to live a good, honest, hardworking life....

Eternity is Now

2011-03-30T16:38:00.000-06:00

I found a quote from Elder Ballard that struck me,

“How well are we feeding, nurturing, training, and exercising the spirits of our children? . . . Remember, eternity is now, not a vague, distant future. We prepare each day, right now, for eternal life.”
—Elder M. Russell Ballard"

The parent perspective is an interesting one. I have five daughters and when I parent, my perspective often turns towards what I don't want them to be. For example, I don't want them to be a prostitute when they grow up. I don't want them to lie, cheat, and steal their way through life, etc. I realize that in order to be the best parent I can, I must first nurture and prepare my children for their grand future, not spend my efforts avoiding some potential negative life path.

I suppose the value of this quote for me is that I have come to the realization that we better serve our children by embracing their full potential without fear of the opposition to that potential. I also realize that this speaks to the way we view ourselves.

Life after Porn

2011-03-29T14:04:00.000-06:00

A mission friend of mine is a high-councilor in a stake in Southern Arizona. From time to time we call each other on the phone and talk about school, family, jobs, and the church. Not having been in or on a high council meeting since my mission report over 10 years ago, I would say I am not privy to the experience that these men undertake in holding disciplinary councils or in discussing the challenges facing the local church and its members.

So I asked my friend a simple question, "What is the most common reason that individuals come in for church discipline reasons to the stake?" His answer was two fold and without doubt - sexual misconduct resulting initially from pornography addiction. There were no cases of apostasy to speak of, no cases of drug use, no murder, or child abuse. 99% of all the meetings that they have as a high council seem to include some talk or issue relating to sexual misconduct resulting from pornography.

I wondered for a minute if we sometimes under estimate the size and scope that pornography is being used by the adversary in societies all over the Earth. In doing some research I came across the story of Selley Lubben. Shelly was a porn star for many years in the United States after being a prostitute for years before that. The story that she carries is a powerful one for sure. Now she has a non-profit organization called "Pink Cross Foundation" where she spends her efforts raising money and speaking as an anti-porn activist.

The reason I bring her up specifically is not that she is a Mormon, because I don't believe she is, but rather because there is a 5 part video series of one of her lectures on youtube. The picture quality is not great, but the message is worth being exposed to. I watched just the first part of her presentation and I think that her message is a valuable and worth sharing here. Her presentation can help us to see beyond the cover image that is presented about porn in the world at large. Let us not forget that each porn star, each porn director and writer, are our brothers and sisters. While much of their life right now is spent doing evil works, they can be healed and forgiven. There is life after porn for both those that make porn and those who watch it. The five different video segments are posted below. I know it seems long, but perhaps you can watch a different one each day this week leading up to General Conference this weekend.

mormon.org

2011-03-26T20:19:00.003-06:00

I've been reading a book on Orrin Porter Rockwell lately and it's interesting to me, to put in context what I've been reading with my recent interactions on the new http://www.mormon.org website. There are these really neat videos of various mormons with various backgrounds showing the diversity of the membership of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. How does this relate to Porter Rockwell? Well.... he was a colorful character and a faithful Latter Day Saint in his time. While there is a feeling sometimes of a homogenous group of people who call themselves mormon, reality couldn't be further from the truth. I think diversity of culture and background are healthy aspects to a uniting faith in Jesus Christ and am extremely satisfied to see the membership's diversity being shared through the videos on mormon.org. Check 'em out.

quote for the day

2011-03-14T04:30:00.001-06:00

"Democracy is 2 wolves and a lamb voting to see what they will have for lunch, Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the outcome of the vote." - Ben Franklin

Focus on the positive

2011-03-13T12:44:00.000-06:00

President Uchtdorf's first presidency message for this month approaches the subject of having a positive mental attitude in all that we do. "Looking for the good" is an idea that does seem to be a minority paradigm in the world today. I am not sure if this is the result of their being more bad than good in the world, or that negativism or pessimism is how people want to be - at least not intentionally. Pres. Uchtdorf asks the question, "Have you ever noticed that people can usually find whatever they are looking for?"

This concept reminds me of the scripture in Matthew 6:21 which reads, "For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also." When considering politics, being positive is an especially difficult task. In many ways being negative seems like shooting fish in a barrel, other times being negative feels more like habit. Some chose to do the same with religion, and morality as if to be moral is an inherently offensive position worthy of ridicule and a dissenting social position.

To further understand the value of being positive as a principle of godliness I wish to bring together the principle from D&C 58:42 which reads "Behold, he who has repented of his sins, the same is forgiven, and I, the Lord, remember them no more." God choses to remember sins no more, but no where in the scriptures have I read where God remembers our good deeds no more. This is not a position that bad things don't happen, or that sin doesn't exist. Instead, the focus seems to be more on our accomplishments, or our potential.

How do we find this balance in the world of politics or society?

This might as well have been spoken today, except the numbers are bigger

2011-03-10T18:22:00.003-07:00

I do wish to point one thing out, Brother Ezra cites a quote from James Madison about his opposition to having the words "promote the general welfare" as listed as a duty of Congress. Madison warned that with these words, the government would take it upon themselves to pay teachers, educate children and house and feed the poor.

If care is not taken to understand what Madison is saying, it would be easy to take this quote out of context. Madison being a key player in the founding of the Bill of Rights, he would not have had issue with States and local governments doing these things. The issue is with the federal government taking it upon themselves. Free public education (developed locally) was blossoming in Madisons day for youth.

President Benson knew what was coming, look how close we are to financial insolvency today, because of federal entitlements, ie: wealth redistibution.

Something has been missing at the Spirit of the Law Blog

2011-03-08T09:13:00.000-07:00

Something has been missing at the Spirit of the Law blog for sometime - the spirit part of the title. I recognize my own faults in being sucked into meaningless conversations focusing on the negative aspects of this world. After all most political conversations these days are about what the 'other guys' are doing wrong, not about what we are doing that is right or about real ideas that can make this world more than just a better place - but the place it ought to be.

I realize that we have attempted to discuss aspects of secular life then occasionally seek to squeeze that into a spiritual paradigm. This simply won't work - it hasn't worked. The following article from Elder Oaks given at BYU really brings to light the pursuits of secular and scholarly work as it relates to gospel study and gospel knowledge. I do hope that you take the time to read this as I believe every individual who claims to be a blogger, scholar, or writer of any kind while simultaneously considering themselves a "faithful member of the church" as I do, should be able to fully reconcile themselves to the teachings in this talk. After reading this talk, I realized that I was off in my blogging and writing pursuits and now seek to make changes accordingly.

I recognize that some who have commented on this blog have diminished our conclusions based on the idea that they are spiritually or religiously based and therefore not universally valid. I now say with all the kindness I can muster up, truth is not to be diminished simply due to some secular and therefore lacking standard of truth. I declare that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is the true church of Jesus Christ on the Earth. As members of that church we embrace truth and do not fear it. This is why we should strive to find the truth, not from Fox News, or CNN, research statistics, or some blog - including ours. Rather we should understand that we are all in the pursuit of truth from God. And in that pursuit we often share ideas we feel embrace truth revealed by God who is the source of all truth.

As stated before, in times past we have brought forward a secular source and seek to cram or adjust that information to fit a spiritual context (sometimes we even stay at the secular). I would like to call for a change in priority. Let us put gospel ideals first, then, for the sake of discussion and in expanding our support of that truth, seek sources in the secular, political, or social realm, that are in general agreement or are application of that truth. I recognize the difficulty that this might pose - We might actually have to accept something as truth first; unalterable truth. However, understanding that no amount of scholarship can save us, I recognize that the gospel of Jesus Christ should be our priority; not the democrats or republicans. Ideals and truths can propel us into a great society but only when properly understood against the backdrop of the gospel of Jesus Christ. I encourage commenters and blog writers to embrace a similar perspective as we seek to move forward the cause of Christ, not a political ideal or temporal pursuit.

Books we should be reading

2011-03-07T16:00:00.000-07:00

I wanted to share two videos from someone who gives an very valid perspective. Please watch the two videos and consider checking out Arthur Brooks.

It would seem that there are some gospel ideals in what he is presenting. If heaven was simply a distribution of blessings, a system where no one actually earned anything, then this life would be a place without happiness. In many ways I see the gospel perspective here being a very clear parallel to what Arthur is sharing economically.

The moral issue of the federal big 3

2011-03-07T09:02:00.003-07:00

This video shows the lunacy of trying to solve our deficit and debt by cutting military and just about anything else without also cutting the big 3: Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security.

This is immoral what we are bequeathing to our posterity.

Racism: Are they born that way?

2011-03-05T10:33:00.000-07:00

The debate over gays being born with the tendency to be gay is an interesting one. We have debated this issue over and over again to the point that it is almost not something I want to bring up anymore. However, I started to think about other "intolerances" or preferences that exist in society, and wether or not the defense of these behaviors would be acceptable defenses if the "born that way" defense would work there as well.

I thought about racism. Racism is not always manifested as hatred for a race, it can also be preference for one race over another. Would we be okay or find it socially acceptable if people claimed that they should be accepted in society for being racist because they were born that way? Probably not.

Interestingly, as I did some research on this topic, there were many articles that came up regarding Lady Ga-Ga's album "Born That Way." A majority of Lady Ga-Ga's performance and culture is in support of gays - almost like the next Cher. Then I came across an article on Queer Today, a hub for "social justice activists" (gay supporters), that speaks to the damage that this long held position of being born gay has on society and on their own cause.

The article actually references the dangers of gays consigning themselves to the gay fate due to being born that way. Some of the gays don't buy that argument, so why should we? The article should be an interesting read for all sides.

Sage perspective on Energy

2011-03-05T08:36:00.006-07:00

Since we have been discussing energy lately, here is one of the best talks I have heard in a long time about realistic energy potential for the future in North America.

The speaker is a man named Patrick Moore. He was one of the original founders of Greenpeace, but has left the organization he helped form and now campaigns on the opposite side of several positions he used to hold. He is a fascinating man to listen to. I find his approach to these issues to be quite measured and well thought out.

At what cost?

2011-03-03T11:46:00.001-07:00

People all over the world are starting to feel the pains of the gas pump again due to tensions in the middle east. Gas prices in some parts of the country are reaching past 4.00 a gallon. This effects food prices, air travel, and just about every other aspect of our lives not just our car drive to work in the morning.

Environmentalists for some time have stood in the way of a viable and possible solution, drilling in Alaska or other parts of our own country. The argument against such is the abuse of nature, or it's bad for the environment.

However, us oil production would provide for more jobs (something we need right now), and greater control over our own gas supply (something we need right now).

Let's consider the value of this argument in light of another environmental argument - the increased use of electricity. What if 80 percent of our electricity came from the middle east or some foreign country? What if you couldn't turn on your lights or tv or in some cases heat water or cook food because Egypt didn't like their leader? What if Christmas lights had to be rationed because Lybia is in civil unrest?

As weird as that sounds environmentalists are advocating for greater use of electricity, an energy source that we as a people have influence on the supply of. Would electric cars be as attractive if the prices were as volatile as gasoline? I wonder....

Why defense of the 1st Amendment in protecting religious belief is so important an issue for our day

2011-03-03T09:39:00.005-07:00

Click on the link to read a story I just came across. It is from a Northwest newspaper and is about a UK couple who have been denied their rights to be foster parents after having done so for decades. What is the reason for their denial by a UK court? They are traditional Christians who believe that homosexuality is sinful behavior.

Their crime is not in advocating violence against gays. It is not for advocating the stripping of their civil rights. Those would be justifiable reasons for concern into bringing state controlled children into the home. No, thier crime for which THEY are losing a civil liberty, the honor of helping kids, is for their unwavering conviction that gay actions are sinful.

Thanks to James for highlighting Elder Dallin H. Oaks university speech about the need to protect the rights of religious speech as codified in the 1st Amendment in the bill of rights. The more I read lately, the more it reveals itself to be an incredibly relevant warning for us in the United States, and for the world.

How much is ever enough?

2011-03-01T13:50:00.009-07:00

The 2011 budget deficit is forecasted at $1.5 trillion. The top 1% of taxpayers in 2009 made approximately $790 billion. If we tax them at 100%, we still have a .71 trillion dollar deficit for 2011, in addition to having stripped down to the point of nothing all the wealth of over 3.5 million Americans.

Were we to cut the entire DOD budget down to zero, and also eliminate ALL Federal law enforcement functions, it still would not close the budget deficit, though it would come close. The irony is that those are the most core of federal services, and specifically enumerated for them to do. What is eating all the money are programs that should not even be at the federal level in the first place - entitlements. And debt.

How much is appropriate to take from our wealthiest, to pay for what we cannot afford? We could take 100% of the money from the top 5% of wage earners. That would actually come close to closing the current federal budget deficit - just for this year. Next year we would be in the same mess, and then there would be no upper crust to soak. The wealth would have to be stripped from the next strata of economic class. It also would not cover paying down any debt, and that P&I grows every year. It also would leave nearly 18 million Americans newly penniless. This would be the class with the most experience in creating new wealth, new jobs and businesses, and that they also have dependents to feed. Those 18 or so million are just the wage earners, not spouses and children.

So for those who are always talking about "soaking the rich" to pay for precious federal entitlements, how much is ever enough? Especially when depleting all the money from our entire social upper crust wont solve anything in our budget, beyond at best closing the deficit for one single year, and at a cost of robbing millions of people down to destitution?

Socialism as the Libyan "Solution"

2011-02-25T12:05:00.007-07:00

Click on the picture to enlarge, then look closely to the top book and you will see the author: Moamar Khadaffi. You will read that he ruled under the premise that Socialism was the answer to economic problems and the problems of representative democracy.

I know, I know, those here who espouse state run socialism will say that he was merely a dictator wrapping himself in the name of socialism. However, I would ask this: Where has state run socialism not been wrapped around like a cloak by those who are or who aspire for dictatorial like powers? There are places that have newly adopted SI parties into majority power. Australia is the largest by far. It is new, and hasnt taken great root yet. I am curious to see how it develops there over time.

We can add Khadaffi to the heap of failed socialist dictators, and it is a big heap. We have been warned in holy writ against these kind of power regimes. We see example after example of why.

Obedience to the unenforceable

2011-02-25T09:26:00.000-07:00

We have referred to Elder Oaks' recent talk on defending the right to the free practice of religion in previous posts and comments. I am not sure if any of you have taken the chance to watch the follow up video that is posted on the church's website going further into the topics that he entered into, but there is a statement that I will paraphrase and find interesting. Elder Oaks mentioned the value of religion as a teacher of moral principles that solve many of the problems that society and government are otherwise unable to find answer. Namely that it is impossible for the government to enforce all its laws due to lack of resources. Religion teaches obedience to the unenforceable.

I wanted to explore further the idea of what we consider to be unenforceable laws based on the the limits that are upon government for either resources, or as constitutional protections allow. For example, I consider the PatriotAct to be surpassing a constitutional limit that should have made the law unenforceable.

Where do moral teach obedience to laws that would otherwise be unenforceable?

God save the King.... actually please do us a favor and don't.

2011-02-24T13:49:00.003-07:00

This one is a little tricky..... "In a major reversal, the Obama administration said Wednesday that the Defense of Marriage Act – which defines marriage as only between a man and a woman -- is unconstitutional." per the New York Daily News.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2011/02/23/2011-02-23_obama_doma_unconstitutional_will_stop_defending_federal_gay_marriage_ban_in_cour.html?r=news

So if I understand this correctly.... Obama told Eric Holder to spread the word that the president wants the judicial system to stop defending the Defense of Marriage Act which defines marriage as between a man and a woman.

First of all, obviously I disagree with this because I believe marriage is only defined as a union between one man and one woman, but this isn't the most pertinent issue. The fact that the President can deem something unconstitutional merely by decree is extremely disturbing. We are on the precipice of tyranny. What a world......

Forced taxpayer funding of forced union dues are financing the protest the President is helping to orchestrate

2011-02-23T17:03:00.008-07:00

Click on the title of this to see a link to our President's official fundraising arm, "Organizing for America". Here you will see the level of involvement his party and adminstration has in fueling these protests.

Then check out this video that shows AFL-CIO President Richard Trumpka admitting that he has the Presidents ear and or personal face time almost DAILY.

Now observe how these recipients of the taxpayer money that funds their forced union dues treat their fellow taxpayer, who dares to question the scheme:

This coming from folks who call the tea party a bunch a racist old white people. I am tired of the lies, and the taking of taxpayer money by those who will never say thank you, but only spit upon you if you question it. In the end, I believe this will not stand. I believe this is the screaming and thrashing of a movement that will soon drown in the sea of political and social opinion, under the shipwreck of its own weight.

Unions can be their own worst enemy

2011-02-20T20:58:00.000-07:00

In the great state of Wisconsin teachers, more accurately, Labor Unions, have placed the education of the children of the state on hold and have held their state leaders hostage over a bill designed to secure their state pensions in a time where many don't have jobs let alone pensions. Instead of realizing that in order to do what is best for the people, the legislators have to save the people from the Unions. By doing so, the bill in place will limit the collective bargaining power of the unions - in other words, the thing that is the greatest threat to the teachers really is the Unions and the power they hold.

This threat to labor unions is so significant that unions of other trades have come to the state to support the teachers union. The ugly truth in this move is that these unions don't really care about the teachers, they care about what this bill will mean to their unions as well. The precedent is a threat. If this were about education, the teachers would still be teaching. If this were about money, they would understand that all of America is having to make changes that protect our futures at the expense of the moment or short term.

Perhaps, the issue is not as easy I view it. But one part of this issue is quite clear. The Democratic law makers that have skipped town and left the state have lost any honor of their position. There is no excuse, no protest that I consider to be a valid explanation for running away. If you are not a fan of the law, then vote against it. Running away is deplorable. Each one of those elected officials should be ashamed of themselves.

Socialist International in the Middle East

2011-02-09T18:38:00.005-07:00

Click on the posting title for a link to an article about the governments of Egypt and Tunisia. Here is the deal. They have both belonged for decades to the Socialist International; a confederation of socialist movements around the world, which has US representation in the DSA (Democratic Socialists of America).

For all the talk of these governments being corrupt, we can know that it was not due to some failure of the free market and limited government.

Why do I always harp on this?

There are many in the world today who are confused as to the dangers of Marxism. Most of the worlds atrocities in the 20th century, in terms of actual numbers of casualty, were perpetuated in the name of this sinister philosophy.

Also, when you hear reports in the MSM that these movements show some kind of breakdown or rejection of free-markets and capitalism, you can laugh and sigh, and know better. You can see the lie for what it is.

Perhaps our greatest sin as a nation with our foreign policy in this, is in ever giving legitimacy to a government that affiliates with the Socialist International. Problem is, they have their tantacles deep in the world right now. For example,they are currently in control in Australia. Precarious times we live in....

It also strikes me as interesting that many people who were against the Iraq war said of Saddam, "well at least he kept his people under control and his nation stable". I suppose the same argument goes with Hosni Mubarak, at least until last month.

To a degree we are continually learning as a nation in how we deal with the rest of the world, and it is no easy task. To what degree do we recognize current leaders as sovereign, and to what degree do we support change there? We are being criticized right now for having recognized the leader of Egypt and their ruling party, the SI affiliate. Many say that we should have lent support to the forces of change in Egypt, and these voices of critique are coming from left, right and center.

However, in recent years, many criticized us for NOT recognizing Saddams same role in Iraq, as the agent of stability, the exact reason we found it convenient to recognize Mubarak. Quite a headscratcher.

One thing I do know, the Lord gave us an example in the Book of Mormon of the dangers of people who advocate Marxist thought in our day. They were known as the King-Men in the BOM. They were an enemy to societies that operated by the representation and consent of the governed, and by obedience to a rule of codified law instead of the whims of a man or a very few men. We are warned against giving too much legitimacy and breathing room to these types of governance.

I love this perspective

2011-02-08T13:55:00.001-07:00

Morgan Freeman wishes us all a happy black history month:

The Relevance of Elder Oaks talk on Religious Freedom of Speech

2011-02-08T06:35:00.003-07:00

For any who are still on the fence about the timeliness of the Elder Oaks recents address regarding the need to protect religious freedom, watch this video down below, and also click the title of this post to link to an article about it as well.

What happens when all the government is at the top?

2011-02-05T22:51:00.006-07:00

OK folks,

Who can tell me what this clip from an LA Times reporter has to do with Federalism and the 10th Amendment? Hint: it is really spelled out in the last segment in the final two minutes.

This SoCal journalist may not even have realized that he was making so many of Federalism's points when giving this interview. This is quite a critique of the party that held a chokehold on the people of Mexico for most of the last century(1929-2000), the PRI. During this long reign of one party rule PRI was a member of the Socialist International, and the sister party to the Democratic Socialists of America.

Elder Oaks calls for religious unity in defense of 1st amendment rights

2011-02-05T09:01:00.000-07:00

In one of the most directly instructive discourses on religious freedom, Elder Dallin H. Oaks recently spoke at the Chapman University School of Law. In his speech he made note of the declining moral center of our society, and how moral relativism is creating the decay of 1st amendment rights in many countries of the world.

My favorite quotes from this speech's include:

- "Religious teachings and religious organizations are valuable and important to our free society and therefore deserving of special legal protection."

- "I submit that religious values and political realities are so inter-linked in the origin and perpetuation of this nation that we cannot lose the influence of religion in our public life without seriously jeopardizing our freedoms."

- "The first provision in the Bill of Rights of the United States Constitution is what many believe to be its most important guarantee. It reads:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”

The prohibition against “an establishment of religion” was intended to separate churches and government, to forbid a national church of the kind found in Europe. In the interest of time I will say no more about the establishment of religion, but only concentrate on the First Amendment's direction that the United States shall have “no law [prohibiting] the free exercise [of religion].” For almost a century this guarantee of religious freedom has been understood as a limitation on state as well as federal power.

The guarantee of religious freedom is one of the supremely important founding principles in the United States Constitution, and it is reflected in the constitutions of all 50 of our states. As noted by many, the guarantee's “pre-eminent place” as the first expression in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution identifies freedom of religion as “a cornerstone of American democracy.”

The entire article is actually quite amazing and worth study. To read the full text of the presentation click here.

10th Amendment getting traction

2011-02-01T20:45:00.029-07:00

It is refreshing to hear potential candidates for the 2012 election giving creedence to the fundamental imperative of the 10th Amendment, as shown in this video clip above! Those who have read this blog for any length of time know this is a central theme I constantly pivot almost all political conversation around.

I post this NOT as one who is either endorsing or criticizing Mitt Romney for 2012. Too early for me to do something like that.

My point in posting this here is to highlight what I always thought was Mitt's best answer to attacks on him for the medical insurance reforms he tried as governor. Though this has always been the right answer to the challenge, I have not until now heard him artculate it in this clear and crisp way. See for yourself:

So here is the deal. I actually have never liked his Romneycare stuff, thought it was a bad move, but as a resident of a State that is not spelled Massachussetts, I also have known it is not my say about what happens there on most issues, save those that are federal. I am not even sure if Mitt himself was a huge fan of Romneycare, but he was the MA governor, and the way I understand political theory, he had two distinct jobs to do as an elected official:

1. To sometimes do what you think is best for your people, despite what they may say they want. That is why the people put you there, to be better informed and to be tough, to say no or yes to things while knowing it will make you the unpopular guy in town.

2. To sometimes execute the will of the people as they desire things to be, despite your own personal views on the matter. That is why the people put you there, to execute THEIR popular will, not to be a dictator who thinks he knows better than the people.

These two roles may seem mutually exclusive, but we elect our leaders to do both at different times, and there does not seem to be a clear line as to when each role needs to be acted on. Thus lies the inevitable balancing act that any elected official must be engaged in. With this being said, perhaps he was simply giving Massachussetts what its people clearly wanted? This is the State of Ted Kennedy and John Kerry after all. In this he may have simply chosen to execute the latter of his two roles.

Whatever role Mitt as governor thought he was filling in his Romneycare legislation, he actually did the rest of the country a favor in my opinion, and here is why: By enacting a microcosm of mandated universal health coverage, he gave the idea room to play out on a small stage for the nation to observe. This stage has revealed an overall theme for other governments: "This idea doesn't work well, try something else". We witnessed an approach to an issue tried out in a test labratory. Others can benefit from analyzing the results, determining how to utilize this knowledge in their own arenas, and then setting their own course. And that is exactly the point of the 9th and 10th Amendments.

So perhaps Mitt will or won't be someone I endorse in 2012. Whatever I decide about him, I am glad to at least know he has a sound understanding of the intent in the Bill of Rights, as his is a popular voice in the media, and this issue of federalism is at the core of what is needed in solving much of what is wrong with our nation today. Attention brought to it by a voice that is listened to widely can only be a good thing.

Your thoughts?

Which one is it?

2011-01-31T10:09:00.008-07:00

Iam genuinely perprlexed about something. That something is what folks expect of the US when it comes to Egypt. Here is why I am confused:

1. Some people are complaining that we are not helping the Muslim Brotherhood to topple the Mubarek government that has been in power for 30 years. We are accused of supporting a dictator, instead of lending aid to a movement to build a more democratic government there. We are accused of valuing stability over progress. America needs to lend a hand to establishing democracy and nothing is being done here.

2. Other people complain that we try to be the policeman of the world. They say one of America's sins has been supporting movements in other nations that create instability there. Who are we to meddle in other nation's affairs? It is not our job to force democracy upon the people of the world, like we did in Iraq.

Loud voices in both of these camps can be found domestically, internationally, and interestingly, even in Egypt right now. These are polar opposite views of what our relationship should be with Egypt, and neither can be met except at the expense of the other.

Here is another question. Does anyone really know what all the sides in this protest are really about? Do you know if this rioting there is a movement for more democratic rule and a stronger republic there, or is it a movement for Sharia law and theocratic rule by those with unrelenting hate for the West?

One thing I have observed in the MSM that strikes me as very hypocritical: they seem to have more sympathy for the Muslim Brotherhood than for the Tea Party. Their narrative of the Tea party has been one of violent opportunists and religious fanatacism, while the narrative of the Muslim Brotherhood has been one of glorious struggle for human rights. I have seen precious little, though some, on who the Muslim Brotherhood really are. (and who they really are is an enemy of the West)

Your thoughts please.

Interesting point....

2011-01-30T09:18:00.003-07:00

I saw this picture this morning of a protester in Egypt and a couple of thoughts came to mind. First of all, with this post lets not be petty in pointing out the misspelling/correction of hypocrisy.

I think this protester has a very valid point. We have become synonymous with hypocrites as a nation. Why? Because we have elected political officials and allowed people to represent us who behave hypocritically throughout the world. I don't want this to turn into an Obama-bash because the hypocrisy goes further than just his tenure in office. We're supposed to be a beacon of democracy and freedom to the world, and we have allowed Washington to do whatever it wants as long as us at home can continue watching American idol and spend money at the mall.

From our handling of the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan and interacting with them as long as it was politically expedient because we were sticking it to the Soviets - to then abandoning them once the Russians pulled out - in turn creating a vacuum of power thus allowing the Taliban to take charge. To this latest turn of events in Egypt where Washington is not condoning the protest in Egypt to oust a leader who is not behaving democratically and that the people want out. Granted there is a lot going on in the protest that is de-legitimizing it such as looting museums and destroying mummies....but the point of the protest is valid in that the people have had enough of their president staying in office for 30 years. We as a nation should be supporting democracy and freedom throughout the world not whether or not it's politically expedient but because it's right.

Case in Point - Hillary just released this statement - "We're not advocating any specific outcome."

http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/141095-clinton-on-egypt-were-not-advocating-any-specific-outcome

A little comparison...

2011-01-30T09:06:00.003-07:00

Reagan: Fostered national pride in the military.
Obama: Fostered gay pride in the military.

Reagan: We begin bombing in five minutes.
Obama: We begin golfing in five minutes.

Reagan: Made big government a bad word.
Obama: Made big government a bad dream.

Reagan: A shining city on a hill.
Obama: A home mortgage under water.

Reagan: Just say no.
Obama: Yes we can!

Reagan: Stood up to the Soviets.
Obama: Bowed to the Saudis.

Reagan: “Tear down this wall.”
Obama: Tearing down this country.

Reagan: “Concentrated power has always been the enemy of liberty.”
Obama: Concentrated power has always been the objective.

Reagan: Put labor unions in their place.
Obama: Put labor unions in charge.

Reagan: National health care is socialism.
Obama: National health care is socialism.

Reagan: “Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction.”
Obama: We are that generation.

Reagan: Morning in America.
Obama: Mourning for America.

Reagan: “Man is not free unless government is limited.”
Obama: Man is not limited unless government is free.

Reagan: “Government programs, once launched, never disappear.”
Obama: That’s the plan.

Reagan: “The best minds are not in government.”
Obama: The best mind is in the Oval Office.

Reagan: “I did not take the oath I have just taken with the intention of presiding over the dissolution of the world’s strongest economy.”
Obama: It’s all Bush’s fault.

Reagan: Our adversaries “counted on America to be passive. They counted wrong.”
Obama: Who else can I apologize to?

Reagan: “Trust, but verify.”
Obama: Let’s do whatever Putin wants.

Reagan: “We have a rendezvous with destiny.”
Obama: I have a rendezvous with destiny.

Reagan: Abortion is murder.
Obama: Abortion is paid for.

Reagan: Thou shalt not speak ill of any Republican.
Obama: Thou shalt not speak to any Republican.

Reagan: Appointed the wise Justice Scalia
Obama: Appointed a wise Latina

Reagan: A citizen-politician
Obama: A citizen (?) politician

Reagan: Proposed a missile defense
Obama: Disposed of missile defense

Reagan: “Go ahead, make my day.”
Obama: Go ahead, tax and spend.

Reagan: The nine most terrifying words in the English language are:
Obama: I’m from the government and I’m here to help.

Reagan: “Let’s not go overboard in setting and enforcing tough emission standards from man-made sources.”
Obama: Why not?

Reagan: Middle class values
Obama: Middle class tax hikes

Reagan: “Information is the oxygen of the modern age.”
Obama: Invented the internet kill switch.

Reagan: Supported the death penalty
Obama: Supports the death panels

Reagan: “I know that for America there will always be a bright dawn ahead.”
Obama: Let me get back to you on that one

Tagging the toilets

2011-01-29T11:36:00.001-07:00

In a recent trip to San Francisco, I stayed at the Hotel of the event I was there to attend, the historic Fairmont Hotel.

This beautiful hotel has some amazing architecture and craftsmanship throughout. During a mid-morning break I took a moment to visit the bathroom. As men do, we walk up to the urinal and stare at the wall, or even the plumbing on top of the urinal. This time I noticed that there "tagging," or gang writing, scratched into the chrome of the toilet plumbing. Tagging being the practice of gang members marking their territory or advertising their presence.

On one level I was upset that there seemed to be no place nice enough to not have gang tagging somewhere - except maybe the temple bathrooms.

Then I wondered, "why would you want to 'claim' a toilet as your gang property? Why would you want your gang to be the 'toilet gang'?"

Seriously?!

Foreclosure: The REAL state of the Union.

2011-01-27T10:41:00.000-07:00

New numbers have been released that foreclosures are on the rise in major metropolitan area's. What? I thought we were in a period of economic recovery? It would seem that the words of Obama Christ are not showing the truth in reality.

Ultimately, there is plenty of evidence on the ground level of this country that government cannot and is not being a savior for the economy. It never has, and never will be able to do it, nor should it. People cannot overspend on homes, and expect for the government to save them. The same goes for corporations and state governments who have mismanaged their resources and made bad financial decisions that lead them to where they are. It is a bad idea to dump all the problems onto the federal government because all we are left with is a garbage dump of a government.

Government spending is out of control to the point that our nation is on the brink of foreclosure itself. That is the real state of the Union. Our government has gone past the point where they can say, "we need to stop spending." Stop spending is not an option? How is not spending when we have no money, not an option?! The government is past the point of being able to service its debts, and its people are following that lead.

Right now people are loosing their homes. Some are loosing their homes because they were greedy. So, lesson learned. Some are loosing their homes because they have lost their jobs. What doesn't make sense to me is we have people loosing their jobs on one hand, yet I see job openings all over the place. Name one state or county that doesn't have a job board filled with job opportunities.... go ahead I'm waiting.

There are jobs. There are opportunities for entrepreneurship. Perhaps the real crisis in this country is not lack of employment, it is lack of humility. So what if times are tough - be tougher! If you are loosing your home, guess what, is working in fast food worse than being homeless? Is delivering pizza to make ends meet worse than eating in a soup kitchen? There are jobs, perhaps we should be willing to work the fields (instead of the illegals) to provide for our families.

Perhaps our country isn't being humbled enough, hence this second wave of foreclosures. Perhaps people should be homeless if that becomes the means for them to appreciate what they had when they had when they had it. Opportunity is still all around us - but foreclosure is still happening. Perhaps we should stop looking to mommy and daddy government to save us, and grow up as a people.

Anti-violence speaker gets arrested for assault

2011-01-26T16:15:00.002-07:00

The irony's of this article are far too funny to avoid mention on the blog. This classy anti-gang violence messenger from the group "We Stop Killings" did not do himself or any others a favor by beating a 40 year old woman in her car outside a Burlington Coat Factory. Since we are not a news organization we don't have to say "allegedly," I'm pretty sure this happened.

For those of you interested in seeing his promotional video, enjoy the following. From what I see there should be more message and less pictures. But I suppose this just goes to show that there might not be much real substance to what would otherwise be a good cause.

Blogging on the Sabbath

2011-01-24T10:44:00.000-07:00

I have participated on other blogs which means I at least subscribe to the comments of the posts I comment on. Most of the blogs I comment on are "mormon" related. With that being said, this last Sunday, I noticed a tremendous amount of emails coming in announcing comments that were being made on Sunday. In the past on this blog I have also made comments on sunday, even made posts on Sunday.

It wasn't until this last Sunday that I asked myself the question, "Is blogging, or commenting on a blog, an appropriate Sabbath day activity?" I realize that in some ways this could venture into one of those things where we should not be "commanded in all things." I still feel as if the question is a valid in that many of these conversations can get agitated and outside of the spirit of the Sabbath. Should Sunday also be a day of rest from blogging?

The US welfare system - the easy bake oven of charity

2011-01-21T10:18:00.001-07:00

At a very valid and healthy discussion over at the Millennial Star Blog, we were approaching the subject of the responsibilities of poor people. In the course of the discussion we slid over briefly to the subject of health care were many good points made, one being that the misuse of medical insurance is its own worst enemy. That insurance should be used to insure against big things, not pay for everything little thing (it adds up quickly). The analogy that was used was that we don't pay for gas with our auto insurance, why should we pay for routine things with medical insurance?

Well said in my opinion. However, this was given in light of the idea of the role of welfare with respect to the responsibility of each individual and the responsibilities of government. I still have not seen a good argument relating to the necessity for government to be the source of so many welfare program through the taxation of its citizens? Why is government welfare the first line of defense for so many? And why do so many push for government to be the solution.

I came up with a metaphor that I hope describes the role of the welfare system of the United States. Government welfare is like cooking in an easy bake oven. Sure the job might eventually get done, but you might die of hunger in the meantime. For those of you that don't know what an easy bake oven is, it was a toy baking product used primarily by children as an introduction to baking that used the heat from an incandescent light bulb to cook brownie batter. It took hours to cook a small little square of brownie batter than would otherwise take 20 minutes in a conventional oven.

This metaphor speaks to inefficiency, to poor use of resources, and to the time it takes for government to operate. If we care about the poor and the needy then we should also want to see the system that can provide real help when needed is as efficient as possible - government has so far shown to be incapable of providing such a service or at an acceptable level of efficiency. Hence, the easy bake oven analogy:

Star's waiting to get married

2011-01-21T06:00:00.000-07:00

I have heard a few stories lately of hollywood celebrities who have decided to wait until gay marriage is legal to get married themselves. The latest is Full House star Jodie Sweetin who was proposed to this last week by her long time boyfriend and "baby dady" to their child. They have not set a date because they are waiting for gay marriage first - no matter how long it takes. This supposedly passive aggressive form of protest is not one I would see being all that effective. Why? Because, who cares if a celebrity gets married or not. It isn't necessarily hurting society as a whole for this to happen.

Generally protests are designed to disrupt economic activities or political movement in order to encourage change through disruption or economic injury. But this? Think of the gay wedding planners who won't be getting paid to put on her wedding? They are the one's getting hurt, not society.

I do find this to be a very odd form of protest. I am not sure there is much value in doing so. Nevertheless, to each his own in sharing their voice.

Kennedy Speech 50 Years Later

2011-01-20T11:28:00.004-07:00

I found it interesting that today we celebrate 50 years since Kenendy's powerful inauguration speech. I don't wish to direct commentary on this but all you all to watch the video and reflect.

I wonder if Kennedy were around today if he would be a democrat, a republican, maybe even a tea partier? The rhetoric is interesting nonetheless.

Tofurky

2011-01-20T08:34:00.002-07:00

However satirical, I think it's disturbingly plausible.....

"Winston, come into the dining room, it's time to eat," Julia yelled to her husband.

"In a minute, honey, it's a tie score," he answered. Actually Winston wasn't very interested in the traditional holiday football game between Detroit and Washington . Ever since the government passed the Civility in Sports Statute of 2017, outlawing tackle football for its "unseemly violence" and the "bad example it sets for the rest of the world," Winston was far less of a football fan than he used to be. Two-hand touch wasn't nearly as exciting.

Yet it wasn't the game that Winston was uninterested in. It was more the thought of eating another TofuTurkey. Even though it was the best type of VeggieMeat available after the government revised the American Anti-Obesity Act of 2018, adding fowl to the list of federally-forbidden foods, (which already included potatoes, cranberry sauce and mince-meat pie), it wasn't anything like real turkey. And ever since the government officially changed the name of "Thanksgiving Day" to "A National Day of Atonement" in 2020 to officially acknowledge the Pilgrims' historically brutal treatment of Native Americans, the holiday had lost a lot of its luster.

Eating in the dining room was also a bit daunting. The unearthly gleam of government-mandated fluorescent light bulbs made the TofuTurkey look even weirder than it actually was, and the room was always cold. Ever since Congress passed the Power Conservation Act of 2016, mandating all thermostats-which were monitored and controlled by the electric company-be kept at 68 degrees, every room on the north side of the house was barely tolerable throughout the entire winter.

Still, it was good getting together with family. Or at least most of the family. Winston missed his mother, who passed on in October, when she had used up her legal allotment of life-saving medical treatment. He had had many heated conversations with the Regional Health Consortium, spawned when the private insurance market finally went bankrupt, and everyone was forced into the government health care program. And though he demanded she be kept on her treatment, it was a futile effort. "The RHC's resources are limited," explained the government bureaucrat Winston spoke with on the phone. "Your mother received all the benefits to which she was entitled. I'm sorry for your loss."

Ed couldn't make it either. He had forgotten to plug in his electric car last night, the only kind available after the Anti-Fossil Fuel Bill of 2021 outlawed the use of the combustion engines-for everyone but government officials. The fifty mile round trip was about ten miles too far, and Ed didn't want to spend a frosty night on the road somewhere between here and there.

Thankfully, Winston's brother, John, and his wife were flying in. Winston made sure that the dining room chairs had extra cushions for the occasion. No one complained more than John about the pain of sitting down so soon after the government-mandated cavity searches at airports, which severely aggravated his hemorrhoids. Ever since a terrorist successfully smuggled a cavity bomb onto a jetliner, the TSA told Americans the added "inconvenience" was an "absolute necessity" in order to stay "one step ahead of the terrorists." Winston's own body had grown accustomed to such probing ever since the government expanded their scope to just about anywhere a crowd gathered, via Anti-Profiling Act of 2022. That law made it a crime to single out any group or individual for "unequal scrutiny," even when probable cause was involved. Thus, cavity searches at malls, train stations, bus depots, etc., etc., had become almost routine. Almost..

The Supreme Court is reviewing the statute, but most Americans expect a Court composed of six progressives and three conservatives to leave the law intact. "A living Constitution is extremely flexible," said the Court's eldest member, Elena Kagan . " Europe has had laws like this one for years.. We should learn from their example," she added.

Winston's thoughts turned to his own children. He got along fairly well with his 12-year-old daughter, Brittany, mostly because she ignored him. Winston had long ago surrendered to the idea that she could text anyone at any time, even during Atonement Dinner. Their only real confrontation had occurred when he limited her to 50,000 texts a month, explaining that was all he could afford. She whined for a week, but got over it.

His 16-year-old son, Jason, was another matter altogether. Perhaps it was the constant bombarding he got in public school that global warming , the bird flu , terrorism or any of a number of other calamities were "just around the corner," but Jason had developed a kind of nihilistic attitude that ranged between simmering surliness and outright hostility. It didn't help that Jason had reported his father to the police for smoking a cigarette in the house, an act made criminal by the Smoking Control Statute of 2018, which outlawed smoking anywhere within 500 feet of another human being. Winston paid the $5000 fine, which might have been considered excessive before the American dollar became virtually worthless as a result of QE13. The latest round of quantitative easing the federal government initiated was, once again, to "spur economic growth." This time they promised to push unemployment below its years-long rate of 18%, but Winston was not particularly hopeful.

Yet the family had a lot for which to be thankful, Winston thought, before remembering it was a Day of Atonement . At least he had his memories. He felt a twinge of sadness when he realized his children would never know what life was like in the Good Old Days, long before government promises to make life "fair for everyone" realized their full potential. Winston, like so many of his fellow Americans, never realized how much things could change when they didn't happen all at once, but little by little, so people could get used to them.
He wondered what might have happened if the public had stood up while there was still time, maybe back around 2010, when all the real nonsense began. "Maybe we wouldn't be where we are today if we'd just said 'enough is enough' when we had the chance," he thought.

Christ - the new swear word?

2011-01-19T06:00:00.000-07:00

As I was watching the Golden Globes this last weekend, I was surprised by something that happened repeatedly throughout the broadcast. When the word Christ was used, it was censored as if it were a swear word. This most notably happened during Robert De Niro's acceptance speech. It also happened right from the start of the show with the opening monologue from Ricky Gervais (who was quite brutal if I might add - funny, but brutal.)

The first time I saw it I thought, oh, this must be just an audio glitch. Every time "Christ" was uttered, it was censored. Now, one might make the argument that it was done out of respect..... please. Hollywood does not respect Christ. Plus, if this were out of respect, then the final joke of the evening would have to have been censored as well. "Thank you God for making me an atheist."

Am I surprised by this? Not really, yet at the same time I am, because I never thought that the organization and the people who constantly champion freedom of expression and battle against censorship seem to have no problem with censoring anything that might condemn their capitalizing on immorality. The Golden Globes are awards from the Hollywood Foreign Press - a media outlet censoring? Does that not seem crazy? I know that isn't NBC doing it either because they say that all the time on other NBC shows.

Not sure how many people even noticed it, but a few did anyway.

Freedom is Refreshing

2011-01-17T22:42:00.006-07:00

Freedom.

It is like 7-Up for the soul.

Yeah... its lemon-lime (cannot say lymon, because that is Sprite, after all) effervesence that makes your nose tickle when you take that first drink? That is the feeling of freedom.

I am talking about all kinds of freedom.

The freedom to stand up on a soapbox in a park and proudly proclaim your beliefs without worrying about being arrested (so long as you are not inciting violence).

The freedom to carry your Beretta where- and whenever (nearly) you want to do so.
(Aside: For the record, that is "Beretta" not "Baretta": it is difficult to carry a private investigator wherever you go, let alone his cockatoo 'Fred.').

The freedom to vote for whomever you wish without fear of reprisal or intimidation.

The freedom to read, or write, the books you want without oppression or censorship.

The freedom to be able to worship how, where, and when you desire.

Except in the so-called Bloggernacle, apparently.

Unfortunately, it is an all-too-common practice among supposedly observant Latter-day Saint blog-hosts/-moderators to moderate, censor, and yes, even stifle debate. That is to say, debate against the ideas they believe and support. They willingly moderate and hold posts, preparing and scripting their responses. And then, when they feel they are losing or have lost the argument, shut down the comments altogether. Who knows why they do it: fear? hatred? shame? I do not claim to know. All I know is that, when faced with a little opposition, they inevitably suddenly up and walk away home, taking their baseball with them, bragging to everybody how they won the game.... Of course, it was their ball, and when they leave, how can you argue with them that they won the game?

That is one reason I am proud to be a member of this blog. The Spirit of The Law, regardless of how vitriolic some of us moderators become, it is in defense of our beliefs, beliefs that are under common and vile attacks elsewhere in the supposedly observant and routinely hypocritical LDS Bloggernacle. A place where the Brethren of the Church have urged members to bear our testimonies of the Living Christ and of the truthfulness of His Gospel, and the Restoration of the Gospel in the Latter-days. A place where, all too often, those testimonies are belittled and challenged by those who think that those Brethren--Brethren they supposedly sustain, by the way--are out-dated in their thinking, that they "just don't understand," or even worse, bigots and/or deranged.

Yes, this is the state of a large portion of the "Bloggernacle." It is a hostile place out there. Heck, sometimes it is a hostile place here, too. None of us is perfect, after all.

But for those of you who disagree with the moderators of this site, remember this: at least here, you -- a dissenter -- you get a hearing. I am not sure that I can remember an instance of any of the moderators shutting down argument or locking up a thread. Here, we understand Agency; we may not agree with your choice, or your perspective, or your comments, but you are free to make your argument.

For this, I say 'thank you' to my fellow moderators. I can feel my nose tickling.

And that is Freedom.

Look what the hosers up north are up to!

2011-01-14T20:12:00.005-07:00

I have not posted for a few months now, but will jump back into the fray. So I saw that yesterday the Canadian equivalent tothe FCC decided to ban this song from the airwaves unless it is reworded, because it has the word "Faggot". Please nobody ever tell me again that Canada is a more enlightened nation than ours.

Apparently some radio stations are already planning protests, with Money for Nothing marathons planned - click on the title of this post to see a link to this story.

I could understand someone not playing the video for the brief racy pictures of the hot chick more than for I can for use of the word "faggot". Either way I am not into "banning". I think whatever is percieved as bad speech should be countered with more speech. I get "public decency" clauses, as I dont want pornographic billboards for my kids to see, but this is ridiculous.

What else? Should the video be banned because it shows someone smoking? How about because it shows a heavy set guy (and we dont want to make our kids think that being heavy is OK)? What about all those appliances (it supports consumerism!)?.

Is this worth a national board banning an old song, when current songs are WAAAY worse?

Come work at the State Department!

2011-01-14T19:46:00.002-07:00

So I was researching the State Department today to find out about what career opporunities are available, and I stumbled upon this video - "I advocate for America."
Michelle and Mary, U.S. Diplomats, Public Diplomacy Career Track, Political Career Track
"Mary let her career development officer know that I was going to be starting A-100, which is the orientation class, immediately prior to me joining the service. And they assigned us to serve together in Jerusalem. And in fact, even before it became policy to work to try to keep us together the way they keep together married opposite sex couples the department has been very good to us in terms of working to keep us together and having us serve together."

This is an official video promoting the State Department's advocacy of homosexual couples wanting to serve together - http://careers.state.gov/learn/who-we-are/employee-experiences?movname=jayne Apparently the video has a masked direct link so I can't upload it on here, but I just wanted to get this blog's take on the promotional nature from within a government department of homosexuality in the workplace. It's another aspect of the "Great gay debate" and this aspect to me comes off as....well unprofessional. Why? Because sexual orientation is not something to be discussed in a professional work environment.

Elvis said it best

2011-01-13T16:36:00.001-07:00

In the popular song "A Little Less Conversation" Elvis gave some prophetic words he probably didn't see applying to today's congress of the United States. The opening lines go as follows:

A little less conversation, a little more action please

All this aggravation ain't satisfactioning me

A little more bite and a little less bark

A little less fight and a little more spark

Close your mouth and open up your heart and baby satisfy me

Okay, so I wouldn't refer to the congress as my "baby" but the idea isn't too far off. I would love to be in love with our government. In order for this to happen, I would like to think that a little less talking and a little more doing would make for a more efficient government. In some ways this message applies to us as citizens as well. Perhaps for every nasty word given against a politician we must balance that with some act in service of our communities or our nation.

For those unfamiliar with the song, you can watch the original version in one of Elvis's movies here.

Political Baloney Detector

2011-01-12T16:17:00.000-07:00

I have become exposed to another blog that is worth reading if you should feel so included. The Gently Hew Stone Blog presents some well thought out issues facing society. In a recent blog written in response to the tragic shooting in Arizona, was introduced this idea of political baloney and how we can sift through what is truth and what is fiction when it comes to party politics. Unfortunately, most political baloney detectors I know of have fried from over use in the recent years....

I hope you all stop by and give the article a read. It is well done and is valuable for our discussions on this blog as well.

If being gay isn't a choice, how do we explain bi-sexuals?

2011-01-11T18:27:00.003-07:00

First question:

The debate will probably continue to go on and on as to whether or not someone is born gay, or born with same sex attraction. Even though the latest sciences have not been able to give a solid biological defense, I suppose people will still assume individuals will argue towards something that is outside of their own control as a method of separating themselves and demanding more from society.

I do believe that individuals are given different challenges in life including same sex attraction. But I do believe that it is something that people can chose to overcome... should they chose to. General Authorities have spoken to this issue stating that homosexuality is something exclusive to this life. It did not exist in the pre-mortal life and it won't in the life to come. In other words, homosexuality is not something that is part of your spiritual DNA regardless of how this challenge manifests itself physically here in mortality.

The gay community is somewhat divided over doing "gay science." Some seek for a biological defense to show that they are born this way and therefore should not be discriminated against for their preference. On the other side, some in the gay community look at the genetic science behind homosexuality and are afraid that if a genetic cause for homosexuality is found, that scientists will then provide a "cure" for this genetic discovery (should there ever be one). I say, (attn: gay community) if there is truly nothing wrong with being gay, as is so often interjected in conversation and argument, then there is also nothing wrong with being straight - right? And if there is nothing wrong with being straight, then why fight a "cure?" While one may not have a choice as to their sexuality from birth (using their argument, not mine), why not give someone the choice to be straight if that is biologically manipulatable?

Second question:

Following the same idea that gays often use, that being gay is not a choice but how you are born, how then do gays explain bi-sexuality? I mean this seriously. I have not heard an excuse, explanation, anything from the gay community to explain how someone is bi-sexual, or in other words, how someone can have a choice of who they like; man or woman? Are people born bi-sexual according to the gay community?

Bring it!

2011-01-07T08:55:00.003-07:00

I'm getting really sick and tired of the harrassment of people sharing their opinions about Barack Hussein Obama. R Lee Ermey issued an apology after his comments about B.H.O. which basically consisted of - Obama is trying to implement socialism in America which is destroying it. I understand Gunney feeling the need to apologize only in the consideration that the event was not the correct venue for sharing such opinions - it was a toys for tots fundraiser. Other than that his comments do not necessitate an apology - it's an opinion. Why isn't Matt Damon harrassed to the point of public apology for all of his asenine comments? Or any other celebretard for that matter.... And then there's UFC Fighter Jacob Volkman who said he'd like to fight Obama in the ring, and recieves a visit from the Secret Service!?! How much money was wasted flying the Secret Service to Minnesota, per diem, putting 'em up in a hotel, so they could question Volkman about comments he did not deny making?! Come on, this is ridiculous. We're precipitating into a pre-WWII Germany, with Gestapo and SS (not the secret service) harrassing citizens for disparaging comments about the nation's leader.

http://sports.yahoo.com/mma/news;_ylt=AkPS94eW5I.6m1uc2HBwXPFzfNdF?slug=mmaweekly-b0eb628c4e352ae5a67151dca2a17281

What or who opposes Mormonism?

2011-01-04T20:42:00.000-07:00

I came across this quote from Neal A. Maxwell that I felt was relevant and worth sharing. We live in a time where more and more people are empowered through the accessibility of blogs and other media, to attack the church and the work that we are truly about. It is their right and of course I defend their right to do so. However, that does not make this quote any less applicable.

Here goes:

“If the Church were not true, our enemies would be bored rather than threatened, and acquiescent rather than anxious. Hell is moved only when things move heavenward.”