Views from the Crow's Nest

Something I Need to Work On

2012-01-13T18:48:00.000-08:00

I’ve been pondering writing this for the past week. This past fast Sunday I prayed and fasted that I could be a better friend to my friends. When I was done one of the impressions I had was that one thing that I need to work on this year is to allow people into my life that want to be there and try to stop trying to appeal to those that I have to fight for attention, acceptance approval from. This also applies to racking my brain about how my beliefs, opinions, appearance, perceptions, and actions are perceived by others and how in turn it affects other's opinion of me. Also how I can be a better friend, when that’s all I’ve tried to be from the start.

I don't know where in my childhood I ever picked up “people pleasing” but if I could stab it in the heart I think a huge burden would be lifted don't you? Maybe it's that I never moved past the pain of feeling like I was the "only one" (LDS) in high school or “the only one at church” (with SSA) Who knows? I know part of it is a constant battle between trying to be Christ-like and accepting and loving and tolerant vs. being co-dependent and needy. In the end I feel alone a lot as if I haven’t done enough.

I also know what is often perceived as needy by some is often more a reflection of that persons lack of desire to be friends with me or some issue within themselves, maybe my issues mirror their own too much and I'm a painful reflection and most of the time I need to realize that it has very little to do with who I am. I need to stop allowing the acceptance of others to fuel my own self-acceptance. Maybe my opinions offend them. Maybe it’s just a personality thing. I need to stop obsessing over it and wanting to make it right if my efforts just make it worse and the other person is unwilling or perhaps unable to be open to it.

I know my heart is in the right place when I try to make friends and offer support. I also know that sometimes these attempts are unwanted and seen as a violation of boundaries or protective walls. I need to respect others, and also accept this is more “them” then “me” and step away. I've been hurt in the process of trying to make friends and have often felt rejection in my efforts but I also need to realize that my friendship is just as valuable as that person’s acceptance and their rejection isn't an indication of a lack of my worth as a person. This isn't an easy lesson, but I think it’s one I need to work on applying to my life.

In the end I think we are all going to feel a lot of sadness and regret over the things we wasted our times stressing about. I often worry if I’m wasting my time focusing on one thing when I need to put my energy towards something that is worth my time. If I’ve tried to reach out to someone and for some reason they reject that, I think the Christ-like thing to do is to not close the door, just don’t stand by the door waiting. I need to keep on my journey and if those people ever do want to be my friend they can come find me. The important thing is that I don’t close the door but that I don’t waste time in my own progression waiting.

Sometimes the only way we can be close to someone is by praying for them. But I know that I need for my own emotional well-being to stop judging myself by the way others see me and start seeing myself as the Savior does and that is someone worth knowing and loving.

What Makes A Hero?

2011-12-07T17:55:00.001-08:00

The other day I was chatting with a friend and he told me that he felt I put him on a pedestal and thought of him as a hero and that this made him feel uncomfortable. He added that long as I thought of him as a hero that we could never really be friends that he wanted me to think of him as an equal. I told him we could compromise on this. What I really should have explained was how I define a hero.Super heroes to me aren’t really heroes. While they are fictional, the concept is that they have these extra abilities that allow them to do all kinds of cool stuff like fly or bend things with their minds. For me the definition of a hero is a normal person who uses the abilities they have, the talents they have to do extraordinary things. Super heroes are just using the abilities they have to do things they should be able to do by virtue of their powers. Is this really that spectacular?For me a hero is someone who falls down and gets back up. It's someone who knows what is right and does it. It's someone who may make a mistake and realize that their actions hurt someone and apologizes, not for the sake of repenting of their deed with God, but in making it better with the person they hurt. This will make it right with God, but the intention is selfless and not motivated by a desire to fix things for themselves.A hero is that person who stands up for what is right when it seems like it’s not the PC or the accepted thing to do. He's the guy who may not show up on time to speak in Sacrament meeting but if he doesn’t it’s because he stopped to help someone change a tire on the way to church. They may not be perfect but they understand that perfection isn't about a state but a process, it’s about becoming complete and they are trying. They may not be able to recite scripture word-for-word but their lives are an example of the Gospel in action.A hero to me is someone who may not write a book, who may not ever grace the cover of a fashion magazine or look good in their jeans or whatever. But they are an example and a reflection of what they believe. They may be the last to finish the race, but they didn't give up. They may fall down on their climb to the top and sometimes they may have to stop and sit for a while, and ponder if they really do want to keep climbing, but they do eventually get back up and look down only to see how far they have made it.They may not always spell everything correct. Their ties don’t always match their shirt. Their hair may not always have product in it. They may have bad breath. They may not even be able to lift their own body weight.Heroes for me are the ones who realize that sometimes holding on to the Iron Rod is possible only if they are holding and supporting someone who is also doing this. They aren't afraid to hold on tight to someone else while they cling desperately with their other hand. They don't give up on people, they forgive; try to see the best and the potential in someone and they love like Christ would.Heroes don't stand on their pedestals, they get off them and they do something extraordinary with what they have. That is what makes the ordinary extraordinary.

The Worst Human Trait

2011-07-28T10:49:00.000-07:00

Today on North Star someone asked what they thought was the worst human trait. I have been talking with someone who has been open to being my friend while we don't agree on a lot of things. This has been refreshing because I see a chance to see things through another perspective. This led me to respond with this post.

Honestly I think selfishness is the worst human trait there is. I also think intolerance bred from ignorance or from reacting to other peoples prejudices. I see a lot of this in the world but I also see a lot of it in the church. My institute teacher often says the only place gossip and gospel are close to each other are in the dictionary. I've also seen it within the LDS SGA community which is really sad because this should be the one place where we can turn for support from people who do really understand. Within the so-called Moho community that has come to mean guys who have an LDS background but don't always live it, it often manifest itself in hatred, resentment and intolerance towards anyone who does hold to the faith in the church as it is presented by the Lord through the prophet, and yes faithful members who struggle see their actions as apostate or trying to rearrange the gospel to fit their needs. It's funny because there is enough contention between these two sides that any kind of conflict between both of them and those who don't struggle seems sort of relative. I also think that even among those of us who struggle with this, just trying to stay faithful doesn't change some traits that I more and more think may be inherent in all of us. Things like being over emotional, over judgmental of anyone who may disagree with us, sometimes over concerned about things like age, looks, and status and judging a persons worth on those things. I don't think those are "gay" traits per say, but I do think they tend to be over emphasized withing that community. I think both cultures are in some way obsessed with different types of perfection that often seem like unobtainable goals. I think the major difference is that worldly perfection and eternal perfection are total opposites. One is prideful and has to do with being "better" then someone else and the other is only met by stripping ourselves of pride. I think when when I begin to see others the way God see them, then I may start to wonder if blocking that person, or ignoring that person was really the Christlike thing to do or if the things that annoy me about someone are just things that I see reflected in myself that I don't want to see and so I try to hide from them.

Can I be the change?

2011-07-19T11:56:00.000-07:00

Been thinking about something today. Sorry this is a bit rambling but I’d really like some input. This morning a friend of mine tweeted that article about the Matis family that I posted yesterday. As a tag he complimented them and said that they must be good people. I knew he was from Utah and that he struggled with SGA and I texted back "You really need to meet them. They are wonderful people." He texted back that he knew them, he just didn't want to out himself. I wrote back that I understand and felt the same way. I did end up putting it on my profile but I struggled with it. He added that he really didn't want to be labeled by the misconceptions that such an association might bring.

I can't say that I don't totally understand and also struggle with that myself. I'm not really open to a lot of people. I am in this group and its 165 people and a couple other secret groups. But at work and at home and in my ward not really. I'll confide in people if I feel that it would be beneficial for me and also to them to know so they can better understand me. But in general I don't want to be defined by what I struggle with or worse be branded by stereotypes.

I know this is going to upset a lot of people. I'm sorry. I thought about this all the way to work. Part of me really thinks that these misconceptions and stereotypes in some respect are justified by what people see, but I also wonder if maybe I'm also at fault because I'm not brave enough to stand up and say. Look not everyone who struggles with this, is that way. There are some of us who choose to stay faithful to the church and our temple covenants. Who don't do the things that those who define themselves as gay do. But even saying that in the realm of this group may piss a few people off because they will jump to the conclusion that I think people who use their agency to act out and live that way are bad people. But the fact is that a lot of people judge the whole of the group of people on both ended of the spectrum rather we want to like it or not by the actions of a few extremes.

Who do we identify with? Who do kids see as examples? Are we providing them with good examples of good people?

What kinds of role models do youth growing up in the church who deal with this have? Ty Mansfield and the Matis Book is really one of the only books I can think of. Are there really any positive examples of faithful SSA guys who are public? So where do our youth look for people "like themselves?" The world and look at the message it gives them. I think that is sad. The recent "It gets better campaign" for instance may provide some comfort but what is their real message? It gets better when you get older and act on your feelings and put behind you all that you've been taught? I think a lot of people see religion as hatred because popular culture has used it as a scapegoat for a few hateful bigots who do use religion to bully people. But isn't that just as bad as saying all gay people are like those guys in their underwear or leather chaps and boas at Pride festivals?

Maybe our youth do need examples of real people who are trying. Who do make mistakes but who are doing their best. Most of us believe what we say in our testimonies right? But still sometimes while we may believe something our actions may not reflect that. Does that mean we don't believe it? Most of the time no, most of the times we are just being human and making mistakes and we need to repent. But are we telling kids that that's okay. Not so much that it’s okay to sin. But it’s okay to make mistakes. Do we put the fear of not being perfect in the way of their desire to repent or worse not give up?

Because of this I also think we need to be very careful about what kind things we align ourselves, I was reading some posts in another group, one member has posted that he felt that if the "gay agenda" could align themselves with groups like churches when it comes to things like suicide prevention that they could get the message out that this isn't just "those people" but it’s their kids too. Now yes, I believe this is true. That these are our kids too. But what is their underlying motive here? Is it to prevent these tragic deaths or is it to change the accepted beliefs of those religions by shaming them in order to do so? Have you ever noticed that these groups will laugh at you when you say there is a "gay agenda?" It's there, it's real and one of Satan's biggest tricks is to convince you it's not. So while I do think something needs to be done, I'm very careful about who is doing it.

On the flip side, are our best efforts maybe backfiring? Are our youth afraid so afraid of being imperfect that they hide stuff, repress stuff. Afraid that if they do confide in their parents or church leaders about how they feel, that they will be subject to church discipline and family shame? Just for those feelings? Are they so afraid of disappointing us that they don’t reach out. I honestly do think this is why teenagers do turn to things like drugs or seek out groups that provide the kinds of supports that make them feel better about themselves while advocating things that we know are wrong. This creates further conflict within the young person. Perhaps if we had some programs that we could implement or taught our parents things that they could do or say BEFORE their kids turned to these websites, chat groups or other sources of alternative information we could save a lot of kids from feeling this way.

I wonder if I'm failing to "be an example of a true believer?" I think I need to ponder that. I don't think it should be "be an example of a true believer" who is perfect. Because I’m not perfect and if you want an example of perfection don’t look at me. I love our church leader and General Authorities, but that's often how the come off. Our youth need examples whom don’t seem so far off and perfect that they are unreachable. Maybe I need to do more to be an example of the person I'm trying to be. Does anyone understand what I'm trying to say? Let me know. I think the real answer is that we need to be the change.

Unbinding our Tongues

2011-06-26T07:23:00.000-07:00

This weekend is Stake Conference here, one of the visiting speakers talked about one of Satan's biggest tools in thwarting the Lord's plan. He reminded us that when the Prophet Joseph Smith wanted to know truth he asked in faith that he would receive an answer. Later when he put that faith into practice in the Sacred Grove, before he got received the First Vision which would change the world as he knew it, Satan attacked him full force. Lucifer's method of attack is one that he commonly uses on us today. What he did to the young boy was what he often does to many of us. He attacked him which such fear so as to bind his tongue and prevent him from speaking.

How many times have I been in a similar situation? Where I allowed fear to "bind my tongue" and prevent me from speaking? How many times have I been in a situation where I knew what was true but out of fear of sounding politically incorrect or bigoted or intolerant because the world has made those of us that do have standards based on the gospel and not the world out to be? Isn't it ironic how when we attack wickedness we are labeled wrong, while when they promote wickedness they are politically correct? He added that one of the Brethern's greatest concerns for the youth isn't so much to isolate them from the world but to protect them.

I thought about that in view of recent events. I honestly don't think the Lord wants passive aggressive saints. While it is true that we can't allow pride to fuel our efforts, we can be confident and in fact we need to be bold in doing so, The fact that as the boy prophet was told not to join any of the other churches because they were incorrect, didn't make him any better then any other Christian at the time. But that doesn't change the fact that they were wrong and the Lord gave him clear directions to follow. When we follow the prophet we have the Lord's endorsement behind our efforts as well. Just like Joseph faced ridicule and persecution because he refused to deny his testimony of the truth even when it pitted him against the people in his town, state and in some cases family, while it estranged him from even his in-laws and eventually lead to his martyrdom, he didn't back down under pressure from other church denominations, civic leaders, and mobs. He stood for what was right and even at his death he stood for what was the will of the Lord. He sealed his testimony wit his blood. He did this with love, tolerance and even forgiveness for those who disagreed with him, but he never wavered in his conviction to the truth.

Brothers and Sisters, we can't be ashamed or apologize for the gospel, and again we can't be prideful or puffed up, but at the same time just because the world or Hollywood or those who claim to be more "tolerant" or "socially open minded and progressive" think we are closed minded because we do follow Christ and not market research. We know we are right! Does the Pres Monson go around apologizing for the truth? We don't have to go about this with at martyr type attitude either. We have nothing to be ashamed of or need to apologize for, we have the greatest gift the world can ever have, we have what most of the world is searching for in desperation. What more we aren't being selfish with it, we want to give it to everyone. We know the truth, we can be happy about it. We should find comfort in it. We need to share it. We need to let that light reflect in us. Honestly our testimonies are least effective if we confine them to testimony meetings, while its a good thing to share them there, they can only really be effective in sharing the gospel once we leave the chapel doors.

For those of you who like Christian music there is a song that I've always kept as a personal statement of faith. I'd like to share the lyrics at the close of this post. It's called "I'm Not Ashamed." by The Newsboys.

I'm not ashamed to let you know
I want this light in me to show
I'm not ashamed to speak the name of Jesus Christ.

What are we sneaking around for?
Who are we trying to please?
Shrugging off sin, apologizing
Like we're spreading some kind of disease
I'm saying "No way. No Way."

I'm not ashamed to let you know
I want this light in me to show
I'm not ashamed to speak the name of Jesus Christ.

This one (said) it's a lost cause
Save your testimonies for churchtime.
Other ones state you'd better wait
Until you do a little market research
I'm saying "No way. No way."

Detox and Diet for the Soul

2011-06-06T12:24:00.000-07:00

I've been on a diet/cleanse deal, not so much to lose weight to "look good" but more because I've realized that I'm not healthy. I found myself getting winded doing things that shouldn’t wind me and there are other family health issues that I want to avoid. I also discovered that in holding my friends kids at church I was rapidly losing my lap. So it was time for a change.

I think that its a big mistake to allow how the world perceives us or defines us to shade how we define ourselves if that isn't really what we are. But too often I think that's the case.

A few months ago my brother got onto facebook and went photo wild, he started to post pics that were decades old of me when I was in college and post mission. The funny thing was that at the time I really thought I was huge, like really fat. Now looking at the pics I'm shocked at how sickenly thin and gaunt I looked. Growing up I was made fun of because I was the fat kid in school, I wore glasses and I was the only Mormon. So yes, this opened me up to all kinds of persecution. Because I didn't participate in all the partying and sex talk in high school I was defined as a fag. Looking at those pictures now and seeing that I wasn't anywhere fat makes me wonder if I've also allowed those people to influence my SSA, because honestly I don't remember a time before school when I felt that way.

I have a good friend who is pretty into the whole gay scene and who is for lack of a better word what a lot of us would define as hot. However while there isn't an ounce of body fat anywhere on him, he is constantly on one fad diet after another to lose weight. I know that it’s because he has immersed himself in a club culture that does put more value on age and body appearance then what is really important. I know that he is covering up real issues with these body issues. Part of it comes with having people around that love you for who you are not what you are. I feel so bad for him because he says he's happy but I can tell he isn't.

I think that part of our mortal struggle is to balance who we are with what we want against what we believe. I think at times when what we want is over shadowed by what we want at the moment we run into trouble. Again my doctor explained to me that appetite is of the mind and is an emotional need but real hunger is of the body. We need to feed the body to nourish it. When I started the cleanse I went cold turkey and stopped eating surgery, refined and processed foods and other things like that. Almost immediately my body rebelled and I went through four days of the worst headaches ever. After that though, I felt a lot more energy. But those four days were horrible.

Isn't it funny how the things we crave can attack us if we don't bend to them? I think there is a moral lessen there. I know that the natural man is the enemy of God and that we need to strive towards the eternal and put away the natural man. But it’s not always easy when on one hand you really want to be faithful but on the other the sugary stuff really is good and will satisfy us for a short time. But in the end look at what it does to us. In the end it’s the stuff that provides the real nourishment, not the empty calories or the sugar rush that makes us healthy.

When "It Gets Better"

2011-05-16T12:18:00.000-07:00

The other day I was at home watching "The Office" when this ad came on. It was paid for by google and it was all about how "It Gets Better" for teens struggling with SSA as they grow up. After watching it I was left feeling empty and sick.

I find nothing comforting or uplifting in something that may encourage a young person to turn their back on the gospel and pursue a lifestyle that will lead them away from Heavenly Father.

So much has been said about the evils of "bullying" what hasn't been said is that these kind of messages, on the surface they seem good. We all want to ease the pain and the suffering of those who feel alone and isolated. But is the remedy that is being offered really the cure? Will this really lead to happiness? No, and this is how Satan uses the appearance of "good" to do "bad."

In reality these messages add to the conflict which many point out lead to confusion, pain and teen suicides. If parents of a teen struggling with SSA are doing everything they can to love and support their child but are doing it within the gospel then these messages do conflict with that effort. What these messages are saying is that the only way for it "to get better" is to embrace your sexuality, make being gay part of who you, part of your identity, and act on it. This does run counter to the gospel, and so anyone who opposes that idea is now suddenly guilty of being a bully for advocating the opposite. Parents are now the bad guys because they don't "accept" who their child is. The church is now the bully because it rejects who they are. And anyone who believes that acting on it is a sin is a bully as well. On the other hand, if the child tries to stay faithful to the church and its teachings this group will attack them as not being true to themselves or being repressed.

You know, Elder Holland spoke about how “it does get better,” at the last General Conference and this is the message we should share with our friends who struggle. He was right. When we accept that it is the gospel that makes us happy, not what the world or Google tells us, it will get bettter. When we accept the fact that we children of a loving God, it gets better. When we accept that our true self is eternal, it gets better. It gets better because of the atonement. It gets better because we know the truth of the gospel. Those are the truths that make everything better.

Reaching out for the right kind of support

2011-02-13T12:05:00.000-08:00

Support is a tricky word and it can mean a lot of things to different people. From personal experience I've learned that before I look for it, I need to first decide what I want it to be.

Within the church it's often taken to mean unconditional love and encouragement to stay faithful to the doctrines and commandments. Forgiveness of our weaknesses while at the the same time encouragement to keep going. Understanding and comfort. This is all good and is what I consider support to be. To walk next to and hold up a friend. Someone to talk to and trust and confide in. In theory this should be easy to find within the church. In practice its often not.

I sometimes see myself falling into that trap. It's hard to find support when everyone around you seems perfect and able to stand on their own. In a culture that holds perfection as our goal, reaching out often feels unconformable because we feel unworthy to ask for help or worse we feel those who are striving for perfection may not understand or worse reject those who need help. And those who struggle with SGA may not want the world to know of their struggles so they suffer in silence afraid or unwilling to bear to their burdens to others because it would mean having to admit them. Ironically it means putting on the facade of perfection where people look at you at you and feel the same way.

Support from the world outside the church can be just the opposite, and at times the short term pseudo positive effects feel good. This is really dangerous when we are weak and searching. For some support means helping someone step away from what they view as repression. Helping someone "be themselves," helping someone be "true" to who they really are. Removing the conflict. Isn't that what gay pride is all about? To them this means leaving the church and acting out. This can often come from people who have little or no knowledge of the church other then what they have heard or seen in a movie or how the church is portrayed in the gay media. This is almost always bad. Because they have never had the real effects of the gospel they only see the rules and commandments, they don't understand the blessings. They only see someone who is not happy because of what they are denying themselves to make others happy and for them the pursuit of happiness is the goal of life. For them this is being a true friend is helping the person be happy.

Now right off the bat I want to state that some of these people are genuine and well meaning. In their hearts I feel they think they are doing good because Satan has deceived them and they do feel that those of us who are trying are repressing ourselves. Part of this is the loss of the influence of the Holy Ghost that confirms truth to them. Lets face it, its hard to make a good choice when you don't have that anymore.

Next to support, the term Safe is also one that can be misused or twisted. It's tragic but also telling when people who are in the world so to speak say they feel "unsafe" in environments that truth is taught and the Spirit is strong. Are they confusing the feeling of unease with the Holy Ghost? Ever attend a FHE or a Sacrament meeting, walk away full of strength and enlightenment and then hear or read a blog later from someone who also attended who felt "unsafe" and "attacked?"

There is of course one type of support that is the most dangerous and that is support from someone with an agenda. It's most dangerous when it coming from someone who is a former or ex member of the church who has an ax to grind and sees bringing down another member as a way of striking out at something they feel has hurt them. Often times these people still deep in their hearts love the church, but have been hurt and want to punish or hurt it as badly as they feel. They often have horror stories about how badly they were treated and how unsafe they felt in church.

A few years ago I came across a guy like this that had grown up in the ward north of me, I was feeling alone and searching and found myself on one of those websites. I started chatting with this guy and found out he was LDS or used to be. I thought cool, he'll get it. And at first he was very nice, very supportive and very cool with the church. But then he started to hammer away at it, just a little bit at a time. I was also happy to find out he was LDS and thought that maybe I could help him come back home.

After a while he started to tell me horror stories about how terrible he had been treated and how he was almost violently kicked out of the church. I don't think he knew that I was familiar with the ward he was talking about and knew many of the same people. Out of curiosity I asked some these people and found out that they had bent over backwards for this guy. He had been baptized when he was was in his late teens. Members literally gave this guy everything he could ask for in order to help "bring him up to speed" so to speak in the gospel. Even to the point of offering to pay for his mission and his schooling. He had several members families who loved and supported him and even opened their homes to him.

The truth was that the horror stories occurred when he choose to turn his back on the church and started to act out and he soon became a really negative influence on the other youth. Of course the parents where concerned. He had also developed a fascination with anti-Mormon items and was always in the mood to debate things and share them with others at times when it wasn't appropriate like in lessons. Apparently after talking to some of those involved the bishop asked him to cool it and he took that as rejection and moved in with a guy in the next town who was much older and started a relationship. There is always two sides to every story. Since then he's been really active in anti-Mormon, pro-gay groups and acts against the church as much as possible targeting those who are in search of support. To this day he works with a group in the next largest town south of me that serves as an outreach to young gay teen Mormons. For him its a ministry.

Of course when I found this out I knew I had been called to save him. But sadly, once he found out that I wasn't going to be converted to his way of thinking he didn't say goodbye, he just wrote me off. I found myself rejected as a friend and blocked on his social networking deal. And I found out that he had bad mouthed me to mutual friends to try to discredit me. This hurt, but I also realized that after a lot of prayer that the Lord would never expose me to this kind of stuff when I was weak in order to save someone else. Yes, I guess I could have been a good influence on him, but when I tried it seemed to chase him off. I never preached to him.

From personal experience the fact that I even met that guy online shows that to me how easy it is to find bad support. Brothers and Sisters, it is out there. Don't fall for it.

Yes, the internet is a powerful tool, I've learned to be very careful about the places you look to make friends. A good rule is that you will almost always find the type of friends in the type of site it is. I know I always try to convince myself that there may be just that one other guy who is there to find friends, but that's also self deception and justification. I should know if I reach into a snake pit, I'll more then likely end up with a handful of snake.

I also know that when we are down and low we often sometimes loose our judgment because we want to be around someone who understands so its easy to fall for these wolves in sheep clothing. We often will resent those who are really trying to help, we may lash out at those who have our best interests in mind and justify it by saying they just don't get. This has taught me a great deal. Real Christlike support will never end up with one person getting hurt or losing their faith. It will build not tear down. That's a good thing to ponder.

President Packer and 1 Nephi 16

2010-10-13T00:20:00.000-07:00

Ever since this whole thing has erupted I've been pondering 1 Nephi 16. I think this is a really good example of that. Yes, President Packer could have been more sensitive to the feelings of those who struggle with this and whose feeling ar...e close to the surface. These are hard things to listen hear. But this is no different then Nephi's brothers who: "Thou hast declared unto us hard things, more than we are able to bear." (V.1) I agree. But I also agree with Nephi's response. "And it came to pass that I said unto them that I knew that I had spoken hard things against the wicked, according to the truth; and the righteous have I justified, and testified that they should be lifted up at the last day; wherefore, the guilty taketh the truth to be hard, for it cutteth them to the very center." Notice that he did say "and the rightous I did justify?" That means those who may struggle with things but seek to stay faithful. Nephi didn't say these things out of hatred or intolernce. He said these things out of love, I truly feel in my heart that Pres Packer also feels this great love and urgency that we follow the Lord and am "willing to hearken to the truth, and give heed unto it, that ye might walk uprightly before God" we will be blessed. Pres Packer has a solemn responsibility to warn us and somethings what he warns us against may be things we have issues with.

When I'm faced with a situation where I may feel offended I sometimes worry when I find something that I personally feel is out of line with what I may feel is right and its because it offends me even if it does line up with what is doctrinal, it's just not presented in a comfortable way. Honestly I guess in some ways its better to be offended now then not to be warned because the consequences could be far worse then the discomfort I feel at the moment.

I Thank Thee O God For a Prophet

2010-08-10T22:05:00.000-07:00

All this week as I prayed about this whole Prop 8 situation, the one thing that keeps coming to mind is how grateful I am for my testimony in the gospel and the church. Over and over the words of the hymn "We Thank The O God For a Prophet" has filled my mind when I was feeling low. I don't have to go searching for the path to follow, if I listen the Holy Ghost confirms truth to me.

It is so true and it wraps up this whole situation.

"We Thank Thee O God For A Prophet, To Guide Us in These Latter-day."

That really is what a Prophet does, if we heed his guidance he does "lighten our minds with its rays."

He is not only the Prophet for the church but for the world. His message is that of the Savior Jesus Christ. When he and the First Presidency speaks as the First Presidency you can have faith its under the direction of the Holy Ghost. And its what God would have them say.

When I read of the things that these people are working for, I know that as Pres Monson said, "Without him we won't be successful, with him we can't fail." I think of the last words of that hymn. "While they who reject his glad message will never such happiness know." These are the same people who as the hymns say "Fight against Zion," who "will surly be smitten at last."

Now I'm not happy about this, some of these people are good friends of mine. I mourn that they are lost. I hope they will make the choice to come back. But I can't let my friendship with them prevent me from standing for what's right and I won't change what I believe just to make them happy or feel good about themselves.

Now I know that gay marriage may very well be legal soon. Even if it does go against the mind and will of God. The world is full of things that are wicked and "legal."

Abortion is legal and that also is a wicked thing. But I do know that as long as I do my best to stand for whats right I will be blessed for it. As the hymn says "When dark clouds of trouble hang over us and threaten our peace to destroy, There is hope smiling brightly before us and we know that deliverance is neigh."

So that is why I "Thank Thee O God For a Prophet." Because I don't have to be confused. Because I know which side is the Lords side. It's the side that the Prophet is on. When he asked me to help support Prop 8, as the Prophet, I know it was the same as God asking me to. I have faith in that. I have a testimony of that.

I don't think I follow blindly, but I also don't need to prove him time after time. However again "We doubt not the Lord nor His Blessings, we've proved him in day's that are past." The truth here is that because I know I don't have to doubt. I can move past this and as the song says "Thus on to eternal progression, the honest and faithful will go."

In someways this is like the whole pioneer deal. The journey to the west wasn't easy. It was deadly for some. When they got to the Salt Lake Valley it wasn't the most welcoming place either. But they had faith and they persevered and they made the desert blossom like a rose. We can choose to be like those brave pioneers who moved forward in faith amid some of the worst hardships and yes SSA is just that. Or we can allow that challenge to define us and shade every choice and decision in our life and influence our relationship with God and the Spirit. I choose to to be the one who makes that choice, I'm not a prisoner to my challenges.

I do "Thank Thee Oh God For A Prophet."

Civic Virtue: A Unique Knowledge and Sacred Duty

2010-06-14T07:56:00.000-07:00

Text of my talk given in Sacrament meeting on 13 June 2010. Source material is listed below.

As members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints we have a unique knowledge of the divine nature of both the United States and of the Constitution.

We know from scriptures found in the Book of Mormon that America is a land that was held in reserve for the last days in which a system of government could be established that would allow for the restoration of the gospel and for it to be spread throughout the world.

Ezra Taft Benson, 13th President of the Church and U.S. President Dwight Eisenhower’s Secretary of Agriculture taught: “For centuries the Lord kept America hidden in the hollow of His hand until the time was right to unveil her for her destiny in the last days.”

In 2 Nephi 1:8, Nephi reveals the Lords plan: “It is wisdom that this land should be kept as yet from the knowledge of other nations for behold, many nations would overrun the land, that there would be no place for an inheritance.”

In the Lord’s due time His Spirit “wrought upon” Columbus, the pilgrims, the Puritans, and others to come to America. They testified of God’s intervention in their behalf. The Book of Mormon records in 1 Nephi 13:16 that they humbled “themselves before the Lord; and the power of the Lord was with them.”

Our Father in Heaven planned the coming forth of the Founding Fathers and their form of government as the necessary great prologue leading to the restoration of the gospel. The Lord spoke of this in D&C 101:80: “I established the Constitution of this land by the hands of wise men whom I raised up unto this very purpose.”

Recall what our Savior Jesus Christ said nearly two thousand years ago when He visited this promised land: “For it is wisdom in the Father that they should be established in this land, and be set up as a free people by the power of the Father, that these things might come forth” (3 Ne. 21:4).

America, the land of liberty, was to be the Lord’s latter-day base of operations for His restored church.

With this unique knowledge come and equally unique and sacred responsibility.

As members of The Church and as citizens of the United States what should be our role be? Elder Dallin H. Oaks of the Quorum of the Twelve has posed that question: Should not just believing, but knowing that we have an inspired Constitution affect our behavior toward law and government? It should and it does.

Elder Oaks stressed that as U.S. citizens and faithful members of the church we should follow the First Presidency’s counsel to study the Constitution. We should be familiar with its great fundamentals: the separation of powers, the individual guarantees in the Bill of Rights, the structure of federalism, the sovereignty of the people, and the principles of the rule of the law. And we should oppose any infringement of these inspired fundamentals.

We should be law-abiding citizens, supportive of national, state, and local governments.
The twelfth Article of Faith declares: “We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.”

The Church’s official declaration of belief on this topic can be found in D&C 134 verse 1 and states: “We believe that governments were instituted of God for the benefit of man; and that he holds men accountable for their acts in relation to them, both in making laws and administering them, for the good and safety of society.”

The dedicatory prayer for the Kirtland Temple, as dictated by the Lord and found in the Doctrine and Covenants, contains these words: “May those principles, which were so honorably and nobly defended, namely, the Constitution of our land, by our fathers, be established forever.” (D&C 109:54).

For those who would argue that the Founding Fathers didn’t have God as their inspiration or that the United States isn’t a Christian Nation, need only to read the words of our Founding Fathers.

John Adams, the second president of the United States: “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

Alexander Hamilton, famous as the originator of The Federalist papers and author of fifty-one of the essays, said: “For my own part, I sincerely esteem it a system, which without the finger of God, never could have been suggested and agreed upon by such a diversity of interest”

Those who enjoy the blessings of liberty under a divinely inspired constitution should promote morality, and they should practice what the Founding Fathers called “civic virtue.”

Elder Oaks noted that it is part of our civic duty to be moral in our conduct toward all people. There is no place in responsible citizenship for dishonesty or deceit or for willful law breaking of any kind. We believe with the author of Proverbs that “righteousness exalteth a nation: but sin is a reproach to any people.” (Prov. 14:34.) The personal righteousness of citizens will strengthen a nation more than the force of its arms.

As Citizens we should also be practitioners of “civic virtue” in their conduct toward government. We should be ever willing to fulfill the duties of citizenship. For example, we value the right of trial by jury, we must be willing to serve on juries, even those involving unsavory subject matter. Elder Oaks added that: “Citizens who favor morality cannot leave the enforcement of moral laws to jurors who oppose them.”

The Savior said “render unto Caesar what is Caesar.”

A single word that best describes the fulfillment of the duties of “civic virtue” is patriotism. Citizens should be patriotic. As members of the Church we should be patriots.

When the First Presidency asked members of the church in California to help support and actively participate with work on Prop. 8, locally, it served to open the eyes, as a sort of wake up call for many of us in what we could do if they got involved, and worse what could happen if we didn’t get involved. Prop 8 was successful, but I think even more meaningful is that many members have stayed involved.

As part of my job as a field representative for our State Assemblyman one of the things I’ve had the privilege of doing is to travel throughout the North State visiting the many local patriot groups that have sprung up. I am please to report that many of these groups, especially the one here in this ward have many members of the church among their ranks both in members but especially leadership.

In a letter to members read in Sacrament meeting in 1998 The First Presidency reiterated the divine counsel that members “should be anxiously engaged in a good cause, and do many things to bring to pass righteousness” while using gospel principles as a guide and while cooperating with other like-minded individuals.

“We urge members of the Church to be full participants in political, governmental, and community affairs. Members of the Church are under special obligations to seek out and then uphold those leaders who are wise, good, and honest. D&C 98:10.

“Thus, we strongly urge men and women to be willing to serve on school boards, city and county councils and commissions, state legislatures, and other high offices of either election or appointment, including involvement in the political party of their choice.

“Members are counseled to study the candidates carefully and vote for those individuals they believe will act with integrity and in ways conducive to good communities and good government.”

It is reassuring when you see members of the church heeding this call. We must remember that in a democracy, we all have the same. If we don’t stand up for what we believe we will have to accept what we are given, and we will receive exactly the sort of government we deserve.

The Book of Mormon tells of many great and powerful nations that became that way because they were faithful to the Lord. We also read about the destruction of these people because of their own fall into disbelief.

Two great American Christian civilizations—the Jaredites and the Nephites—were swept off this land because they did not “serve the God of the land, who is Jesus Christ” (Ether 2:12).
What will become of our civilization?

The Book of Mormon warns us relative to our living in this free land: “Wherefore, this land is consecrated unto him whom he shall bring. And if it so be that they shall serve him according to the commandments which he hath given, it shall be a land of liberty unto them; wherefore, they shall never be brought down into captivity; if so, it shall be because of iniquity; for if iniquity shall abound cursed shall be the land for their sakes, but unto the righteous it shall be blessed forever” (2 Ne. 1:7).

I would be willing to bet that the first step in the fall of most of these people wasn’t a huge leap into immorality, but a slow loss of faith because of complicity. Faith without works is dead. Knowledge without action is wasted.

The Proclamation to the World makes mention of this when its calls upon world leaders to take a stand on preserving the sanity of families. I think this warning can be applied to a lack of participation in the process as well.

“We warn that the disintegration of the family will bring upon individuals, communities, and nations the calamities foretold by ancient and modern prophets.”

“We call upon responsible citizens and officers of government everywhere to promote those measures designed to maintain and strengthen the family as the fundamental unit of society.”

We all have our agency, and even those who are members of the church who are active may not always agree with each other. The First Presidency states this in its statement on its role in Government:

“Elected officials who are Latter-day Saints make their own decisions and may not necessarily be in agreement with one another or even with a publicly stated Church position. While the Church may communicate its views to them, as it may to any other elected official, it recognizes that these officials still must make their own choices based on their best judgment and with consideration of the constituencies whom they were elected to represent.”

President Benson further warned us in 1997 that as a nation have apostatized in various degrees from different Constitutional principles as proclaimed by the inspired founders. We are fast approaching that moment prophesied by Joseph Smith when he said: “Even this nation will be on the very verge of crumbling to pieces and tumbling to the ground, and when the Constitution is upon the brink of ruin, this people will be the staff upon which the nation shall lean, and they shall bear the Constitution away from the very verge of destruction.”

President Benson continued that “For centuries our forefathers suffered and sacrificed that we might be the recipients of the blessings of freedom. If they were willing to sacrifice so much to establish us as a free people, should we not be willing to do the same to maintain that freedom for ourselves and for future generations?”

Only in this foreordained land, under its God-inspired Constitution and the resulting environment of freedom, was it possible to have established the restored church. It is our responsibility to see that this freedom is perpetuated so that the Church may more easily flourish in the future.

The Lord said, “Therefore, I, the Lord, justify you, and your brethren of my church, in befriending that law which is the constitutional law of the land.” (D&C 98:6).

How then can we best befriend the Constitution in this critical hour and secure the blessings of liberty and ensure the protection and guidance of our Father in Heaven? President Benson gave four suggestions.

First and foremost, we must be righteous.

Second, we must learn the principles of the Constitution in the tradition of the Founding Fathers.

Third, we must become involved in civic affairs to see that we are properly represented.

Fourth, we must make our influence felt by our vote, our letters, our teaching, and our advice
We, the blessed beneficiaries of the Constitution, face difficult days in America, as stated in Ether 2:10: “a land which is choice above all other lands.”

A Christian nation, that will only stay that way if we choose to step forward and keep preserve it.
May God give us the faith and the courage exhibited by those patriots who pledged their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor.

May we be equally as valiant and as free, I pray in the name of Jesus Christ, amen.

Sources:

The Book of Mormon: Another Testament of Jesus Christ
The Holy Bible: The New Testament

The Doctrine and Covenants

The Pearl of Great Price: The 12th Article of Faith

"Our Divine Constitution" by Ezra Taft Benson
"The Divinely Inspired Constitution" by Elder Dallin H. Oaks
Political Neutrality - LDS Newsroom

A Proclamation to the World

Looking Good vs. Fixing Things

2010-01-23T14:57:00.000-08:00

One of the problems with Mormon culture is that we tend to live in a world of looking good instead of fixing problems, we tend to hide them. Now I'm not condemning "the church" what I'm saying is that we may not really understand the point here. We may not be emotionally or spiritually mature enough to put into practice what we preach, it happens. It's a by product of imperfection on the pathway to perfection.

When I was serving as the secretary of the stake young men it always amused me how much effort we put into the dress code for stake youth dances. Now I'm the first to state that yes modesty is important, but I think sometimes some adults really believe that sticking a boy in a tie and a girl in a dress that goes under her knees is going to prevent them from having sex. I often thought that trying to dress the youth up like little adults wasn't really helping. Well they looked good but were they good?

I remember also the discussion about boys and earrings and passing the sacrament. The rule stated that the boy needs to take the earring or whatever the piercing was out before he could participate. In the back of my mind I kept wondering if the boy had understood why he shouldn't have had the piercing in the first place this wouldn't have been an issue, is just taking it out so he can put it right back in really the answer? And I'm not judging the kid, I'm just judging the reasoning.

I remember going to a number of Christian rock concerts were the youth were a little less well dressed, still modest, but they didn't look like little junior executives and how much they were enjoying themselves, even more none of their parents had to force them to go. It was amazing, yes they were feeling the Spirit without a tie on.

Looking good sometimes helps us feel better when things aren't really good. Lets face it, we are striving for perfection and none of us really understands what that means. We say we believe in repentance, we say we are grateful for it in testimony meetings, we may even cry about it, but we shy away from it at times because the process may be to painful. I have a feeling that the chapel is full of lots of people in the church who want to come forward, who want to "do the right thing, make things right with God" but who don't because they feel what people will say if they do. I know because I've been there.

Some could say they are leading double lives. Yes, the church is full of two camps those who are Saints and those who are pretending. But it's not really that simple is it? I think this is only half of the story. None of us are perfect. And that's not just an excuse its more of a fact. None of us are presently complete or we'd not be here trying to learn how to be. I honestly believe that most people are good and most people want to do the right thing. We can't even begin to understand why people do things they do, the feelings that are real and that motivate others to do things we would never think of. We've all been there I think.

I fear also that it also allows us to judge others who may also be struggling. This is because we don't really know how to deal with it in person. It's like the uncomfortable awkwardness a lot of us face when we meet a handicap person. We don't want to admit it, but its true. We don't want to say the wrong thing and hurt their feelings. And yes some of us may be ignorant about that persons personal struggle or our feelings may be fueled with anger, guilt, misunderstanding or any number of things.

I've often wondered about those who have been confessed, been through the process been excommunicated never come back. I understand why some may leave the church when they no longer feel their beliefs are inline with the church, but those who have submitted to this as part of the repentance process who then don't come back breaks my heart.

I know that I've been taught that church disciple is supposed to be restorative and not punitive. But I also know that a startling number of those who have been through it don't come back. Those who have voluntarily endured it as part of the repentance process, who then stumble and fall are the most tragic because it took great faith to humble themselves to it.

This is where I hope I can be better. Maybe I need to worry less about understanding and more about loving because loving can lead to understanding. Maybe the key is that to love doesn't always mean to understand but just to love.

I think this is an area that the church needs to help teach its members to understand. This is why I think a lot of these good people don't come back, they feel alone, isolated, judged and ostracized. Pondering this I realize however that the church can only teach correct principles, its up to me to put them into practice in my own life. I need to do it myself.

Dancing with the Bears

2010-01-23T13:58:00.001-08:00

A wise man once wrote that there is a great definition for rationalization, it's legitimizing impropriety. He compared this to dancing with a bear noting that its easy to waltz our way into circumstance that we think we can control, when in fact just the opposite occurs and these circumstances end up controlling us.

Personally I have noticed in that in my life when I'm on the dance floor with the bear, it's these times that I become acutely aware of the "gray" areas. Those areas help me justifying being there. Yes, I've been taught right from wrong, black and white, but as I dance with this bear, and as I move further and further from light to darkness, it seems like those dance moves cut off the input of the Spirit. I feel safe because I'm still in the gray, technically the light and I can still feel the light. When in reality, I'm finding it harder and harder to tell the difference. These are also the times when if called on it, I will tell you that things aren't always black and white.

I think everyone has situations, personal "gray zones" so to speak, where we know in our hearts we can't be trusted and that we need to avoid. But then the opportunity presents itself and we begin to legitimize it.

Hyrum Smith, founder of the Franklin Institute and author of the book "Pain Is Inevitable, Misery Is Optional" said that "I am firmly convinced that sin and transgressions are in almost every circumstance a result of some sort of self-deception."

There is a great deal of truth to this.

That's the hard part, being able to not just say it. It's easy to warn others, to preach and to tell others not to do stuff. But its harder to do it yourself. I've found in my life that if I took most of the advice I've given I'd be happier. And I think at times there is a lesson there. It's why we should blog and keep journals so that we can later go back and read it ourselves.

That and admitting I'm not a very good dancer or at least I need to dance with the lights on.

Church Supports Nondiscrimination Ordinances

2009-11-11T16:49:00.000-08:00

I think this is really interesting given that so much has been said by critics about how the LDS Church fosters discrimination and homophobia.

Church Supports Nondiscrimination Ordinances

SALT LAKE CITY 10 November 2009 The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has declared its support of nondiscrimination regulations that would extend protection in matters of housing and employment in Salt Lake City to those with same-sex attraction.

The Church said the Salt Lake City Council’s new nondiscrimination ordinance “is fair and reasonable” and balances fair housing and employment rights with the religious rights of the community.

The remarks, representing the position of the Church’s leadership, were read by Michael Otterson, managing director of Church Public Affairs, as part of a public comment period discussing the ordinances at a Salt Lake City Council meeting tonight. (Read full remarks).

Otterson told city council members: “The issue before you tonight is the right of people to have a roof over their heads and the right to work without being discriminated against. But, importantly, the ordinances also attempts to balance vital issues of religious freedom. In essence, the Church agrees with the approach which Mayor Becker is taking on this matter.”

The Church said that while protections in housing and employment were fair and reasonable, the Church also remains “unequivocally committed to defending the bedrock foundation of marriage between a man and a woman.” Otterson also pointed out that this position was “entirely consistent with the Church’s prior position on these matters.”

Otterson added, “I represent a church that believes in human dignity, in treating others with respect even when we disagree — in fact, especially when we disagree.”

Apostle Says Religious Freedom Is Being Threatened

2009-10-14T13:33:00.000-07:00

This was posted at the newsroom of the official church website. Elder Dallin H. Oaks gave this groundbreaking and thoughtful address at a fireside at BYU-I on Tuesday. It has been picked up by the Associated Press. In connection with his speech, he also gave the following interview.

SALT LAKE CITY - An apostle for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints said religious freedom is being threatened by societal forces intimidating those with religious points of view from having a voice in the public square. (See the full text of the speech here)

Elder Dallin H. Oaks made the comments today (Oct. 13) in a major address to Brigham Young University-Idaho students on the importance of preserving the religious freedoms guaranteed by the United States Constitution.

Elder Oaks has had a front-row seat in observing what he calls the “significant deterioration in the respect accorded to religion” in public life. Prior to his appointment to the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, Elder Oaks had an illustrious law career. He served as a justice on the Utah Supreme Court, was a professor at the University of Chicago Law School and Brigham Young University’s J. Reuben Clark Law School and clerked for Chief Justice Earl Warren of the United States Supreme Court.

Although his address on religious freedom was not written in response to the Proposition 8 battle over same- sex marriage in California, Elder Oaks likened the incidents of outrage against those who prevailed in establishing marriage between a man and a woman to the “widely condemned voter-intimidation of blacks in the South.”

He said members of the Church should not be deterred or coerced into silence by threats. “We must insist on our constitutional right and duty to exercise our religion, to vote our consciences on public issues, and to participate in elections and debates in the public square and the halls of justice.”

Elder Oaks also said religious freedom is being jeopardized by claims of newly alleged human rights. As an example, he referred to a set of principles published by an international human rights group which calls for governments to assure that all persons have the right to practice their religious beliefs regardless of sexual orientation or identity. Elder Oaks said, “This apparently proposes that governments require church practices to ignore gender differences. Any such effort to have governments invade religion to override religious doctrines should be resisted by all believers.”

Noting that the students he was addressing were among the generation that would face continuing challenges to religious freedom, Elder Oaks offered five points of counsel:

* Speak with love and show patience, understanding and compassion to those with differing viewpoints.
* Do not be deterred or coerced into silence by intimidation from opponents, insisting that churches and their members be able to speak out on issues without retaliation.
* Insist on the freedom to preach the doctrines of their faith.
* Be wise in political participation, remaining respectful of those who do not share their religious beliefs and contributing to reasonable discussion.
* Be careful to never support or act on the idea that a person must subscribe to a specific set of religious beliefs in order to qualify for public office.

“Religious values and political realities are so interlinked in the origin and perpetuation of this nation that we cannot lose the influence of Christianity in the public square without seriously jeopardizing our freedoms,” Elder Oaks concluded. “I maintain that this is a political fact, well qualified for argument in the public square by religious people whose freedom to believe and act must always be protected by what is properly called our ‘First Freedom,’ the free exercise of religion.”

The Ten Virgins, the 99 and the one and the Prodical Son: Waiting with a fatted cow

2009-10-07T12:25:00.000-07:00

Growing up I have always wondered how the parable of the Ten Virgins fits with what Christ taught about the 99 and the one.

I used to wonder why if Christ would leave the 99, whom I assumed are those who are faithful, to go after the one who wasn't, then certainly He would also leave the wedding feast and the five wise and prepared Virgins to go after the five who weren't.

I also wondered about how in the the story of the Prodigal Son, the father killed the fatted cow when his wayward son returned.

I used to think of these as conflicting tales. But over time I've come to see them in perspective. They all talk about various places we may find ourselves in the repentance process or even just in life.

When I hear of dear friends who have been brought up in the gospel, much like in the story of the Ten Virgins wherein the five foolish virgins who have been warned to have their oil ready when the bridegroom arrives "throwing in the towel" and choosing to engage in aspects of the homosexual lifestyle such as dating men and getting into relationships that convinces them that they are being true to themselves and whatnot and then leaving the church - I find it a real tragedy.

I think about what the father of the Prodigal must have felt. He had given him the means in which to be able to do what he did which led to him finally "dwelling with the pigs." I think about how God has given us things that are great blessings like sexuality and how some have misused this great blessing for selfish fulfillment.

I've also had friends who have told me that they have a testimony, that they know the church is true BUT they just don't want to or aren't ready to be strong.

Thinking back to the coming of the bridegroom, we don't know when that time will be. We have all been invited to that wedding. And yes, we are the ones who decide to RSVP by being ready for it. Unfortunately the invitation doesn't give the when, it just gives the how and that it's soon.

When the bridegroom does arrive there will be no time to argue or debate his arrival, the fact of the matter will be that he has arrived, HE is here and those without oil after having been given sufficient time to gather it will be left behind, I do mourn for them because these are my brothers and sisters. I feel sorry for them and yes until then I will do everything within my power to support them in getting them to gather oil. But I can't make them. You can't give oil to them. It doesn't work that way. I think until the day does come I will be out searching for them.

We all know his is not an easy life, its not easy to keep our lamps full of oil all the time, our wicks trimmed and ready for the time of the wedding feast. I think we all look for things that provide us comfort and that help us feel like we are normal. But I believe we are all challenged in some way or the other. It's part of the oil gathering process. It's not easy.

But there is a time when we will have to be judged with the oil we do have, the oil we did gather. Until then we should be willing to share, to help other gather their oil. And I think those people who do advocate for the gospel are trying to do that, but its up to the individual to listen and to gather their own oil so to speak.

There are lots of voices out there that would tell us not to bother gathering oil, or that if they didn't gather it that it's okay someone will give them some at the last minute, not to worry because it will be easy to get when its needed. Or that perhaps there is no wedding after all or that those who stock up are the foolish ones. Some would say there is probably no reason to even have a lamp.

But if the gospel is true then one day when the bridegroom or in this case the Savior arrives, it will be too late to barrow and we will need to stand on our own. This is that time, this is the time for us to prepare to meet God, this is our preparatory state. This is mortality. That is why we are here. To make choices on temporal desires when we have a grasp of the eternal perspective is short sighted and much like choosing to put off gathering our oil until its too late.

And this isn't to say that I know that when that day comes Christ will wonder were those Five Foolish Virgins are and where "the One" is. Hopefully they will realize that before the Savior returns that they must also return like the Prodigal Son. And yes when and hopefully they do, we need to be willing to greet them with our fatted cows.

Spiderman socks and a stuffed mouse

2009-09-29T14:14:00.000-07:00

It occurred to me recently that yes it is entirely possible to be faced with challenges and temptations that if we attempt to face alone, on our own, without the Lord's help, will do us in.

Without the atonement we are done for. That's the whole point. We can't do it alone, on our own.

I firmly believe that if we seek the Lord's help when faced with temptation He will always provide a way out. But we also really need to want to avoid it. Not just say we do. And we also need to do all we can to avoid it.

In sacrament meeting I usually sit with a couple who are good friends of mine. A few weeks ago I was sitting the back row and the microphone was broken. I also was helping them keep three kids quiet. This is actually one of my favorite parts of the week.

I looked at the young couple. He's in the elders quorum presidency, she is a Primary teacher. They have a 1, 3 and 5 year-old. I don't know how much they really get out of Sacrament Meeting. They are usually late, but they are always there.

I think its important that we always do our best to be there so to speak. I don't just mean be at church, but just be willing to be where we need to be, where the Lord wants us to be, even if we do mess up. Always try to be where we should be even if we feel the work to get there or stay there is an uphill battle. If we are just willing to do our best to be there, He will meet us there.

While I know its often hard for them they do their best. I look at their struggles and responsibilities and I look at mine and I realize that we all need help but that's why we are friends. He is trying to run his own business. They know they can call me in a time of crisis to babysit or bring dinner over etc. I've taken the wife Christmas shopping when she wanted to get away and surprise her husband. When she was away in Utah I went over and brought him pizza and "did a few dishes" etc. They also help me.

I think that's how we need to all be for each other. This is much like our need to stand by and support each other.

I know its hard for them to always be there. Sometimes the 3 year-old ends up wear Spiderman socks or sandals because he didn't know where his left shoe was. Sometimes the 5 year-old turns up with his stuffed Fival the Mouse. Sometimes the father falls asleep because he was working until midnight. But they are there.

I think God looks at that and smiles. They are always there even with a stuffed mouse and Spiderman socks.

I find a lot of inspiration in that.

Elder Bruce C. Hafen Speaks on Same-Sex Attraction

2009-09-20T16:27:00.000-07:00

For the complete text of Elder Bruce C. Hafen's address on same gender attraction click here Elder Bruce C. Hafen Speaks on Same-Sex Attraction

Don't succumb to cultural confusion, Elder Hafen urges
Deseret News - By Lana Groves and Scott Taylor
Published: Saturday, Sept. 19, 2009

Individuals struggling with same-gender attraction should not let their challenges define their entire identity nor succumb to the increasing cultural confusion swirling around the topic of homosexuality.

That was Elder Bruce C. Hafen's message Saturday morning at the two-day annual conference for Evergreen International, a nonprofit organization dedicated to helping Latter-day Saints diminish same-sex attraction. The organization, which has no affiliation with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, held its conference at the Joseph Smith Memorial Building.

"You are not simply a child of God. You are a son or a daughter of God, with all the masculine or feminine connotations of those words," Elder Hafen, a member of LDS Church's Quorum of the Seventy, told conference attendees Saturday.

"That is your true, eternal identity," he said. "I urge you to seek a testimony, even a personal vision, of that identity. I ask you to take every possible step, each day, to align your physical and emotional life with the spiritual reality of who you really are."

With his background in family law, Elder Hafen, the former dean of BYU's J. Reuben Clark Law School, listed four misconceptions that he said activists try to establish as facts to try to influence policymakers and the public:

* That same-gender attraction is an inborn and unalterable orientation.

* That therapy cannot treat, let alone change, same-gender attraction.

* That most Americans favor same-gender marriage, which means the church is outside the mainstream in opposing it.

* And that there are no rational, nonreligious reasons for opposing same-gender marriage.

Of the latter, Elder Hafen said society and laws have long endorsed marriage between a man and a woman with an honored priority as a significant institution. The result is children of that marriage — the future society — thriving best in a formal family with their own father and mother in a setting befitting society's long-term interests and well-being.

Elder Hafen encouraged conferencegoers to open themselves to God's influence in their lives.

"Then your confidence will grow — not only in him, but in yourself," he said. "I am describing a process, not an event, and it can sometimes seem hopelessly long and difficult. But I promise you that as you learn to connect your righteous desires with his love, his power really will put you home — eventually, all the way home."

Individuals struggling with same-gender attraction should not let their challenges define their entire identity nor succumb to the increasing cultural confusion swirling around the topic of homosexuality.

"Sometimes that attraction may make you feel sinful, even though the attraction alone is not a sin if you do not act on it," he said. "Sometimes you may feel frustration or anger or simply a deep sadness about yourself. But as hard as same-gender attraction is … it does not mean your nature is flawed. Whenever the adversary tries to convince you that you are hopelessly 'that way,' so that acting out your feelings is inevitable, he is lying."

Jesus Christ's atonement offers two healing blessings to those challenged by same-gender attraction, Elder Hafen said.

"First, Christ helps us draw on his strength to become more at one with God, even while overcoming the attraction. He helps us bear the burden of the affliction," he said.

"As a second healing and compensating blessing," he later added, "the atonement enables the grace that assures this grand promise: No eternal blessing — including marriage and family life — will be withheld from those who suffer same-gender attraction, if they do 'all they can do' to remain faithful."

Lessons from Liberty Jail

2009-09-07T13:08:00.000-07:00

Each of us, at some time or another will have to spend some time in Liberty Jail. This is the message of Elder Jeffery R. Holland in his recent CES fireside address, "Lessons from Liberty Jail." (Sept 09 Ensign) Just like the Prophet Joseph Smith and his companions, who endured the cold winter months of 1838-39 in what could only be described as a miserable dungeon for crimes they didn't commit, each of us will face things that seem unfair and unjust. How I personally handle them and what lessons I learn from these experiences depends greatly on how I choose to endure them.

While the conditions were bleak, it was during this time period that some of the most sublime passages of modern scripture were revealed to the prophet. It was during this time of desperation that Joseph pleaded with the Lord (see D&C 121:1-3). In response, the Lord replied that the purpose of our afflictions and the blessings we can obtain if we but endure (see verses 7-8). It was also during this time in what Church historian B.H Roberts calls "the prison temple"—noting the refining elements of the experience—that some of our most sacred spiritual instruction, including the Lord's teaching that "many are called but few are chosen" and the proper characteristics for exercising power in the priesthood, is set fourth (see verses 34-43).

Speaking of enduring and learning, Elder Holland promises: "You can have sacred, revelatory, profoundly instructive experience with the Lord in the most miserable experiences of your life-in the worst settings, while enduring the most painful injustices, when facing the most insurmountable odds and oppositions you have ever faced."

While personally I would never pray for bad things to happen in my life, I know I need to be prepared to face them. Elder Holland gives three keys to doing this: first, realize that everyone faces trying times; secondly, that even the worthy will suffer; and third, remain calm, patient, charitable and forgiving at all times. Finally, he concludes that we need to face all things with a cheerful spirit.

For me there are times when I've felt almost overwhelmed by my personal struggles; times when I've felt unfairly judged by others; and worse, times when I've felt used and abandoned by the very people whom I loved and viewed as a friend. At times, I've wondered, "Why me Lord? I'm doing what you asked me to do!" But as Elder Holland points out, "Why not me?" The scriptures and Church history are full of people who have suffered and endured things that they clearly didn't deserve. The atonement is the supreme example of this. According to Elder Holland, our trials put us in good company.

Ironically, the times when I feel the furthest from the Lord are the very moments when I am the closet to Him if I but reach for Him. This is one of the lessons of Liberty Jail. Sometimes these bad days are those humbling moments that I need to remind me that the same things I'm enduring now also happened to the Savior of the world as part of the great atonement—that when I plead, "Lord, how much worse can it get?", the answer is simple: "I died for you so that it won't get worse. I am with thee."

Gossip

2009-07-30T14:48:00.000-07:00

There are a few things in life I have control over. One of these are my actions. There are also a few things that I don't have control over and that's the things people say about me. I would rather people talk about how wonderfully talented I am or my keen sense of style and whatever but sadly not everyone does. I'd like to be viewed as good friend, as someone who cares and who love but again I'm not always. I would love to be sought after as a friend, but sadly that isn't always the case. Fair? Justified? No. Reality? Yes. I was once told that I can't control what people think about me, but I can control what I say or do to other people.

I fear at times that sometimes a person may have a lot of good to say but that they will never be heard because of gossip spread about them by others. Sometimes this is even second or third generation gossip that has evolved into something completely not true but that has lingered on to haunt that person. I've also found through my own experiences that at times the very people who should understand how hard it is will often be the most cruel, the most hurtful. The ones who give you the cold shoulder. This could be because I remind them of what they are trying hard themselves to overcome or perhaps they feel some sort of fear based on "what so and so has told them." But at the same time I don't think we ever progress along the path of salvation by climbing over another person and forcing them under. I hope and pray that I never do that to another person or that my actions never make another person feel that way.

We can be the greatest support to others who struggle with SGA because we know what it's like. We can also be the ones who make it worse for others when we do as you said and let gossip or other shallow things prevent us from reaching out.

It takes a very brave person to stand up to a friend we love who may be doing this and say "I've heard that." It takes an even braver friend to take it a step further and say, "Why do you think that is the way it is?" or "Have you actually talked to that person and know that that is the truth?" Challenging them to step back, to take a walk in the others shoes.

Joseph Smith taught that if we have an issue with someone, we should take it up with them personally and in such a way that we resolve it. We do this so that we don't become stumbling blocks to each other. Often times I know from experience that I may have slighted someone or done something to them in the past. I may have since then moved forward and have tried very hard to live the gospel. However, my past actions will always cloud that persons opinion of me and my new good actions may even come off as hypocritical, unless I take the time to make peace with that person and try to resolve things. And yes, I realize that that clouding could be the result of the other persons pride or whatever or maybe its easier to vilify me then to make amends.

There are times when no matter how hard you try to resolve those things, that person may never ever want to and before jumping to whatever conclusions we can come up with we should consider maybe there is something within their own space that prevents them from being able to do that. Once we have apologized sincerely in such a way that it should mean something to that person and not just makes us feel better we should consider walking away but as my grandma once said, leave the door open to them.

Yes, I do believe there are times when it is needed to reach out to warn another person if you feel that they may be getting involved with something or someone that we may know isn't going to be good with them. But there are ways to do that that are uplifting and that may even build up that person you think is dangerous so that they may become someone we don't fear. Why not try to reach out to them and build them up? Again going to that person personally, seeing them as a child of God first and foremost. We need to be careful that we do this out of love for that person. And yes maybe sometimes our fear are justified and we do need to stay clear of them. But I think those times are few and far between. Our motives need to be well meaning and not to tear down. Understanding why a person may be motivated to act or think a certain way goes a long way to developing empathy for them.

If people were less judgmental of each other over stupid things that don't matter, or if we were to let go of second or third generation gossip that we often cling to in order to justify the boundaries we throw up around ourselves, we may soon find that there are a lot of good people out there. Boundaries are there to help protect ourselves not to hurt others. I have found more times then any that there are a lot of human people out there, a lot of imperfect people. And a lot of people just like myself.

Highjacking a victims memory

2009-06-25T15:05:00.002-07:00

It also rubs me the wrong way the way these so called "LDS," gay affirming groups evoke the name of Stuart Matis to play their "political card" in their efforts to lobby the church to change doctrine so that acting on homosexuality is no longer considered a sin.

This is just my opinion, but I don't know and I don't think anyone can really know what was going through Stuarts mind when he made that final tragic decision to end his life. For anyone to say they do is out of place. Yes, he may have left letters, but I don't think anyone can fully understand the thoughts that drove him to it. The closet thing that I can say is that I can relate to the frustration he felt as he struggled to live his life in a way that he believed pleased Heavenly Father, weighed against feelings and attractions that are real, but if acted on conflict with those beliefs. Many of us have been in that same desperate moment, but I think its also an individual experience. To say he did it because of Prop. 22 or anything else I think is really speculation or subjecture on the part of those who are trying to use him to lobby support for their own cause.

It is out of place on many facets. First, because now its between him and Heavenly Father and the Savior, who is the only one who can fully understand him. Secondly, I think that it is really cruel to his family when his name is shanghai-ed by people who never met him or who have only had limited contact with him but claim to be close friends with him. I personally believe that common decency would dictate that it is inappropriate for these groups to post suicide notes and letters as a means to "fight for a cause" when one would wonders if he would really have supported them in the first place, but who have used him as a means to evoke sympathy for their cause.

In addition, for these same groups to use the actions of a small misguided group of church members who do act inappropriately out of intolerance to judge the doctrine and main body of the church as intolerant is rather like judging every gay person by the sick displays of debauchery seen at many pride events.

Yes, I do believe that the Prophet was speaking on behalf of the Lord when in both cases he asked us to give our time, talents and best efforts to support Prop. 22 and in Prop. 8. Just because it may make me uncomfortable because it hits a personal cord in me, doesn't make the voice of the Prophet any less real or valid. But I also do believe that in so doing we also needed to show forth as much love and compassion for those who do struggle and not to be motivated by hatred and intolerance for people who do choose to use their agency in a way that goes against what we have been taught by the Lord through the Prophet to be correct.

I don't think anyone who struggles with SGA was happy that the church was involved in Prop. 22 or Prop. 8. in California. I'm not happy that the church has to get involved in anti-pornography campaigns or in programs that promote adoptions over abortions, but I also understand that sometimes it is necessary for the church to get involved in moral issues that do effect society as a whole and marriage is just that.

The Storm Over the Mormons

2009-06-11T19:34:00.000-07:00

It looks like the LDS Church has found itself in the pages of Time Magazine again. Enjoy!
The Storm Over the Mormons

Some Inspired Words Concerning Prop 8

2009-05-31T23:20:00.000-07:00

Concerning Prop. 8 in California, here are a few quotes from church leaders.

First Presidency Letter read to all congregations in California on 29 June 2008 reads in part:

"The Church’s teachings and position on this moral issue are unequivocal. Marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God, and the formation of families is central to the Creator’s plan for His children. Children are entitled to be born within this bond of marriage.

"We ask that you do all you can to support the proposed constitutional amendment by donating of your means and time to assure that marriage in California is legally defined as being between a man and a woman. Our best efforts are required to preserve the sacred institution of marriage."

Elder Neal A. Maxwell speaking before an audience at Brigham Young University said:

"Discipleship includes good citizenship; and in this connection, if you are careful students of the statements of the modern prophets, you will have noticed that with rare exceptions–especially when the First Presidency has spoken out–the concerns expressed have been over moral issues, not issues between political parties. The declarations are about principles, not people, and causes, not candidates.

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

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

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

"This new irreligious imperialism seeks to disallow certain of people’s opinions simply because those opinions grow out of religious convictions. Resistance to abortion will soon be seen as primitive. Concern over the institution of the family will be viewed as untrendy and unenlightened."

President Gordon B. Hinckley said in his conference talk “Loyalty:”

“Now may I say a word concerning loyalty to the Church. We see much indifference. There are those who say, ‘The Church won’t dictate to me how to think about this, that, or the other, or how to live my life.’

"No, I reply, the Church will not dictate to any man how he should think or what he should do. The Church will point out the way and invite every member to live the gospel and enjoy the blessings that come of such living. The Church will not dictate to any man, but it will counsel, it will persuade, it will urge, and it will expect loyalty from those who profess membership therein.

"When I was a university student, I said to my father on one occasion that I felt the General Authorities had overstepped their prerogatives when they advocated a certain thing. He was a very wise and good man. He said, ‘The President of the Church has instructed us, and I sustain him as prophet, seer, and revelator and intend to follow his counsel.’

"I have now served in the general councils of this Church for 45 years. I have served as an Assistant to the Twelve, as a member of the Twelve, as a Counselor in the First Presidency, and now for eight years as President. I want to give you my testimony that although I have sat in literally thousands of meetings where Church policies and programs have been discussed, I have never been in one where the guidance of the Lord was not sought nor where there was any desire on the part of anyone present to advocate or do anything which would be injurious or coercive to anyone.

"The book of Revelation declares: ‘I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. ‘So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth’ (Rev. 3:15–16).

“I make you a promise, my dear brethren, that while I am serving in my present responsibility I will never consent to nor advocate any policy, any program, any doctrine which will be otherwise than beneficial to the membership of this, the Lord’s Church.

“This is His work. He established it. He has revealed its doctrine. He has outlined its practices. He created its government. It is His work and His kingdom, and He has said, ‘They who are not for me are against me’ (2 Ne. 10:16).

“In 1933 there was a movement in the United States to overturn the law which prohibited commerce in alcoholic beverages. When it came to a vote, Utah was the deciding state.

“I was on a mission, working in London, England, when I read the newspaper headlines that screamed, “Utah Kills Prohibition. President Heber J. Grant, then President of this Church, had pleaded with our people against voting to nullify Prohibition. It broke his heart when so many members of the Church in this state disregarded his counsel.

"On this occasion I am going to talk of uncompromising loyalty to the Church. Each of us has to face the matter—either the Church is true, or it is a fraud. There is no middle ground. It is the Church and kingdom of God, or it is nothing."

From http://www.divideasunder.org/2008/12/proposition-8/

The Proposition 8 Ruling: What It Means

2009-05-31T23:06:00.000-07:00

What did the court decide?
The court ruled against opponents of Proposition 8 and upheld traditional marriage. The key issue before the court was whether Proposition 8 was an amendment or a revision to the state constitution.

A revision is a fundamental alteration of California's governmental structure. A revision requires a 2/3 approval by the legislature before heading to voters. The court agreed with Proposition 8 supporters that the ballot measure was a valid amendment, not a revision. The simple 14-word insertion of the traditional decision of marriage does not fundamentally change the structure of government.

This ruling was a victory for the democratic process and the people's ability to change our governing documents. While Proposition 8 was upheld, it was also subverted by the ruling. In recognizing the 18,000 same-sex unions performed last year, the court undercut the constitution, which clearly states that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.

What about the same-sex marriages performed last summer?
Last May the California Supreme Court overturned Proposition 22, declaring it unconstitutional. Since Proposition 22 was not placed in the constitution, but simply in state law, the court contended that it violated the state's ultimate law, the constitution. Six months later, voters approved Proposition 8, which placed the true definition of marriage in the state constitution, thus superseding the court's ruling. In that six month window, an estimated 18,000 same-sex unions were performed in the state.

The court placed itself in the untenable position of upholding the people's ability to defend traditional marriage and extending marriage rights to same-sex couples. In the end, the court reluctantly agreed Proposition 8 was a valid constitutional amendment, but it held to its social engineering by validating the marriages performed last summer.

The court ruled that Proposition 8 did not contain a "retroactivity provision" and therefore any marriages performed before it took effect were valid. The ruling held that voters did not intend to invalidate existing same-sex marriages, and neither Proposition 8's language nor any voter guide information would lead voters to believe that existing same-sex marriages would be invalidated should Proposition 8 pass. This is an attempt by the court to find a legal loophole in order to placate those they wronged last year by impatiently and imprudently declaring same-sex marriage legal before voters had their say on Proposition 8.

Will same-sex marriages outside of California be recognized?
In the last footnote of the majority opinion, the court indicates it is open to hearing a case on whether same-sex marriages performed outside the state during the six-month window last summer may also be recognized in California. It is doubtful that such marriages would be recognized, especially not until such a legal challenge is brought forward. However, the court does seem to invite such a challenge, and based on their illogical justification for recognizing the 18,000 existing same-sex unions, justices seem amenable to the idea of recognizing out-of-state unions.

Does this mean the fight over marriage is over?
Not at all. Even before the ruling was handed by the court, homosexual activists were organizing and planning their next steps. Already, there is a movement to place a repeal of Proposition 8 on the ballot in 2010. Rallies, protests and demonstrations are scheduled all across the state as opponents of Proposition 8 express their anger.
The day after the ruling was handed down, two lawyers announced they had filed a federal challenge to Proposition 8. Former Solicitor General (under President George W. Bush) Ted Olson and David Boies, who were opponents in the historic Bush v. Gore case of 2000, jointly filed the lawsuit. The suit alleges Proposition 8 violates the United States Constitution's Fourteenth Amendment guarantees of equal protection and due process. On behalf of an Alameda lesbian couple and Los Angeles gay couple, the suit requests an immediate injunction to stop the enforcement of Proposition 8.

There does seem to be some division amongst homosexual groups, as several have denounced the lawsuit, preferring instead to try the issue at the ballot box again. Homosexual advocacy organization Equality California is already laying the groundwork for a statewide ballot initiative to make same-sex marriage legal. If it qualifies, such a measure could appear on the 2010 or 2012 ballot.

We must remain vigilant because the battle for marriage has just begun.

Capital Resource Institute 2009

LDS Church Response to CA Supreme Court Decision on Prop. 8

2009-05-26T13:40:00.000-07:00

SALT LAKE CITY - Today’s decision by the California Supreme Court is welcome. The issue the court decided was whether California citizens validly exercised their right to amend their own constitution to define marriage as between a man and a woman. The court has overwhelmingly affirmed their action.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints recognizes the deeply held feelings on both sides, but strongly affirms its belief that marriage should be between a man and a woman. The bedrock institution of marriage between a man and a woman has profound implications for our society. These implications range from what our children are taught in schools to individual and collective freedom of religious expression and practice.

Accordingly, the Church stands firmly for what it believes is right for the health and well-being of society as a whole. In doing so, it once again affirms that all of us are children of God, and all deserve to be treated with respect. The Church believes that serious discussion of these issues is not helped when extreme elements on both sides of the debate demonize the other.

What we do need to do more as a Church

2009-03-03T16:16:00.000-08:00

I was asked the other day how can the Church do better with the whole SGA issue. I looked back to my life growing up and how I felt and what I believed. I think there may have been some confusion on my part about what was doctrine and what wasn't. A lot of times growing up I did feel alone and isolated. I did feel unloved and confused and scared to ask for help. But I also think it was because things weren't explained. I do think its getting better now.

This is the one area in which I will agree that the church can do more. I do think that it is time for the church to teach or provide guidance to leaders of youth about this topic. I do think that including support material in future editions of "For the Strength of Youth" would make this material more readily available.

I know that I had friends who bought "In Quiet Desperation" removed the cover and read it as if they were reading a dirty magazine making sure to hide it when they left home. I think when young people feel they have to resort to measures like that we do have some issues.

I know how I was raised. I know I was told that homosexuality was a sin and that it was a choice. That people choose to be this way not that people choose to act out. What I wasn't told was that it was "acting on it" that was the choice not the feelings. For a long time I believed that since it was a choice if I wanted it to go away I could choose for those feelings to go. They didn't. Growing up I often felt as if I was the only guy in the church who felt this way and to make it rough I was the only Mormon in my high school so I really didn't fit in anywhere.

It didn't help that I was overweight, wore glasses and was socially awkward. I didn't like sports and was into art and stuff like that.

Many times I would have loved to be talk to someone I felt I could trust. But I always felt that if I did tell someone how I felt that I would be deemed perverted and evil and that I would be excommunicated. And yes while those feelings and a lack of anyone around that I was aware of, kept me from acting out. I did feel really alone and isolated and at times would come home from school, going into my room and begging God to take me away and let me die. Many times all I craved was a best friend.

I went to EFY and that made me realize that I wasn't alone and I made a promise to God that if I served a mission he would help me deal with these feelings.

So my mission came and when the bishop asked me all those questions about "had I" I could honestly say no. But at the same time I felt that because I "wanted to or had wanted to" that I was just as bad. So I felt I had lied my way into the field.

One evening I woke up, there were supposed to be 8 people in our dorm rooms and I realized I was alone. This was odd. But I was feeling troubled. I got on my knees and plead with God and said "I don't know if I should be here or if in serving unfaithfully I'm damning myself, but I have a willing heart and I want to be an instrument in this work, so if you want me I'm yours." I can't describe the peace I felt at that point. I stood up and walked over to the window to see the Provo Temple seemingly floating in the nights sky. I then realized that I was alone and went to find all the other elders in my district. I found them, in the bathroom all crying about how unworthy they were and how they all needed to go home. I spend the rest of the night comforting them, hugging them and getting them all built up. This was one of the most meaningful experiences for me because all these Elders were sure they were unworthy and all of them really were, they just doubted themselves.

So I served, did my part. Hope that I did some good. Came home still liked guys. But I had gained something I didn't have before I left. A real testimony of the gospel and the atonement not just a belief in God. I understood what was real and what was and what wasn't a sin.

In some ways I was grateful that I didn't have the influences of the internet growing up. I know I may have found support like North Star but at the same time I fear what I would have also found when I was desperate to feel loved and accepted. I think the net is a double edge sword.

A few years after my mission I happened upon this yahoo group (pre North Star) and it was the first REAL exposure I had had to those who struggled with same gender attraction who wanted to be faithful. Before that I didn't know they existed. This has been a great comfort to me.

I am grateful for the things that the church has developed since I was a youth. I hope that the leaders can start using them to reach out to those who are struggling before these young people reach out to groups with other agendas who provide information and support that does try to normalize it in their minds. When someone feels alone and unaccepted they will go to where the comfort is.

I think this is one area that those of us who have been there or who may now even be there can reach out and support and love.

So now I'm 36, still overweight, but a lot smarter. I know what I believe and I know what is real. I have a testimony of what I need to do. I try to reach out the best I can to those whom I can. I am single. I am opinionated but my heart is in the right place. Now all I can do is be an example of what I just said. I can try to be part of the solution.

Remember the Duck?

2009-02-09T17:14:00.000-08:00

A boy and a girl were sent to the country to spend the summer with grandparents. When they got there the young boy was give a slingshot. He would go out into the woods and practice shooting at everything and pretty much missing everything.

One day he was heading home for dinner when he walked into the barnyard and say his grandmothers pet duck. He decided to take aim at it and to his surprise and almost immediate horror, this time he hit the poor duck square on the head. It was a dead duck.

So he quickly picked up the duck and hid it behind the woodpile but as he was doing this he realized his sister was witness to the whole things. She didn't say anything, just walked by him and smiled.

That night after dinner grandma said "Well Jenny if you can help me do the dishes we'll be all done." To which Jenny replied, "I'd love to but Billy said he wanted to help you with the dishes tonight." He looked at her and she whispered, "Remember the duck."

This went on all week with Billy doing all his chores and Jenny's also.

That Saturday grandpa came in and said "Billy and Jenny lets go fishing." Grandma then said that she needed help with some work she was doing and said that Jenny needed to stay at home and help her. But Jenny said that Billy had expressed a desire to help with the chore. She looked at him and mouthed "Remember the duck." So he stayed behind and Jenny went fishing with grandpa.

Finally the lying and deception and the extra chores became too much for poor Billy and he finally confessed to Grandma about the fate of the duck. Grandma gave him a hug and said that she already knew about it, she had been at the window and had witnessed the whole thing. She looked at Billy and said that she was waiting to see just how long he would allow himself to be a prisoner of his sisters.

*****************

I really liked this story because I wonder how many times I've allowed myself to be a prisoner of something that I did wrong and I allowed Satan to tell me to "remember the duck." And just like in the story Heavenly Father has seen all things, I can't hide the duck behind the wood pile. He's knows its there. I think this is a good story to share with those who allow themselves to be prisoners. I know its been me a few times.

Carrying our own crosses

2009-02-09T17:13:00.000-08:00

At ward conference yesterday our bishop spoke about "taking up our cross." I have been praying about what I could say or contribute to the whole "giving up" or "giving in" thread and it occurred to me after his talk that its not a matter of either.

Each of us are given unique struggles and trials and experiences and things that refine us, challenge us and help perfect us. Its not so much the trials that make us who we are, it's what we do with them.

The Savior says to "take up our cross," he doesn't say to leave it and walk away from it. He doesn't say to overcome it. For there are some crosses that we can't overcome and only He can overcome. We were never meant to overcome them alone. How we carry it defines who we are and if we trust him enough to allow Him to carry them with us. If we have faith to carry it and put away all ungodliness aside then we can have faith that while the worlds burdens are heavy HIS isn't. He will be the one that comes along and helps us shoulder it.

For me this is where things have often become difficult. While I may say that I want to be faithful, to put aside all ungodliness, its often easy to sabotage my efforts by some of the things I choose to do, people I choose to associate with and the sites I have a presence on online. For instance if I'm trying hard to stay away from negative influences and I want God to bless my efforts if I'm spending a lot of free time on gay social networks trying to make friends or continue associations with people who represent the happiness found when a person pitches their cross and walks away from it. How am I really helping myself? I'm not saying we should judge others, but I'm also saying that we can't build our tents next to the great and spacious buildings of the world to dwell in their shadows and expect the light of the gospel to also play an equal role in our lives. We can't serve to masters. As it was once said we can't live in paradise yet keep a vacation home in Sodem.

I think sometimes I can be my own worse impediment to my own progress. But that takes a lot of humility to admit. Part of learning to bear our cross is learning that struggling isn't a bad thing if it means we are trying hard to continue forward. Struggle denotes a battle. At some point I think we need to realize what we are struggling with. Part of the giving up pride comes when we put that vacation home on the market and walk away from it.

The whole reason we are on the Earth is to gain experience, sometimes those experiences are struggles. Sometimes those struggles are needed to make the path clear. Sometimes we need them. Life is a test after all. Accepting our cross and committing to carrying it doesn't always mean an end to our struggles, but it does denote a decision in what direction we will move forward to. And that's already half the battle.

The Most Happy People - The Queen's 2008 Christmas Message

2008-12-28T11:29:00.000-08:00

While I am not from Great Britain, I was really touched with the sentiments of Queen Elizabeth II's Annual Christmas speech. A lot has been posted recently about "being happy" and "how to be happy" and while Mosiah already gives the formula for true happiness, it was nice to hear it stated from someone else.

Full text of the Queen's message

December 25th, 2008

THE full text of the Queen's Christmas Day message:

"Christmas is a time for celebration, but this year it is a more somber occasion for many. Some of those things which could have been taken for granted suddenly seem less certain and, naturally, give rise to feelings of insecurity.

"People are touched by events which have their roots far across the world. Whether it is the global economy or violence in a distant land, the effects can be keenly felt at home. Once again, many of our service men and women are serving on operations in common cause to bring peace and security to troubled places.

"In this ninetieth year since the end of the First World War, the last survivors recently commemorated the service and enormous sacrifice of their own generation. Their successors in theatres such as Iraq and Afghanistan are still to be found in harm's way in the service of others. For their loved ones, the worry will never cease until they are safely home.

"In such times as these we can all learn some lessons from the past. We might begin to see things in a new perspective. And certainly, we begin to ask ourselves where it is that we can find lasting happiness.

"Over the years, those who have seemed to me to be the most happy, contented and fulfilled have always been the people who have lived the most outgoing and unselfish lives; the kind of people who are generous with their talents or their time. There are those who use their prosperity or good fortune for the benefit of others whether they number among the great philanthropists or are people who, with whatever they have, simply have a desire to help those less fortunate than themselves.

"What they offer comes in the form of what can easily be recognized as service to the nation or service to the wider community. As often as not, however, their unselfishness is a simply-taken-for-granted part of the life of their family or neighborhood.

"They tend to have some sense that life itself is full of blessings and is a precious gift for which we should be thankful. When life seems hard, the courageous do not lie down and accept defeat; instead, they are all the more determined to struggle for a better future.

"I think we have a huge amount to learn from individuals such as these. And what I believe many of us share with them is a source of strength and peace of mind in our own families. Indeed, Prince Philip and I can reflect on the blessing, comfort and support we have gained from our own family in this special year for our son, The Prince of Wales.

"As parents and grandparents, we feel great pride in seeing our family make their own unique contributions to society. Through his charities, The Prince of Wales has worked to support young people and other causes for the benefit of the wider community, and now his sons are following in his footsteps.

"At Christmas, we feel very fortunate to have our family around us. But for many of you, this Christmas will mean separation from loved ones and perhaps reflection on the memories of those no longer with us.

"I hope that, like me, you will be comforted by the example of Jesus of Nazareth who, often in circumstances of great adversity, managed to live an outgoing, unselfish and sacrificial life. Countless millions of people around the world continue to celebrate his birthday at Christmas, inspired by his teaching. He makes it clear that genuine human happiness and satisfaction lie more in giving than receiving; more in serving than in being served.

"We can surely be grateful that, two thousand years after the birth of Jesus, so many of us are able to draw inspiration from his life and message, and to find in him a source of strength and courage. I hope that the Christmas message will encourage and sustain you, too, now and in the coming year.

"I wish you all a very happy Christmas."

How To Be Miserable -

2008-12-11T17:33:00.000-08:00

Daily, constantly, we choose by our desires, our thoughts, and our actions whether we want to be blessed or cursed, happy or miserable. ~Ezra Taft Benson

1. Believe That Things Will Never Change
* Change the way you look at things, and the things you look at change. ~Norman Vincent Peale
* Tough times never last, but tough people do! ~Robert Schuller

2. Think About Your Problems
* Everyone can be discontented if he ignores his blessings and looks only at his burdens. ~Thomas S. Monson

3. Worry About Things You Can't Control
* He who worries about calamities suffers them twice over. ~Og Mandino

4. Complain About Your Blessings or compare them against things you have sacrificed.
* I complained because I had no shoes until I saw a man who had no feet. ~Sign in a shoe shop

5. Think About Yourself
* Generally speaking, the most miserable people I know are those who are obsessed with themselves: the happiest people I know are those who lose themselves in the service of others. ~Gordon B. Hinckley

6. Put Yourself Down (and/or Compare Yourself To Others "Better Off")
* Our doubts are traitors, And make us lose the good we oft might win... ~William Shakespeare

7. Hold Onto Grudges, Don't forgive, Don't give people chances to change
* There is no peace in the nursing of a grudge. There is no happiness in living for the day when you can "get even." ~Gordon B. Hinckley

8. Put Deadlines On Your Happiness (i.e. "I won't be happy until __________ happens.")
* Happiness is a decision, not a destination. It's and attitude, not an event! ~John Bytheway

9. Always Want More
* Remember that in the end, surely God will be looking only for clean hands, not full ones. ~Jeffrey R. Holland

10. Postpone Prayer
* Ask and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you. ~ Matthew 7:7

11. Recycle Regrets
* The past is behind; learn from it. The future is ahead; prepare for it. The present is here; live in it! ~Thomas S. Monson

The Proposed Boycott and Finding Friends in the Darnest Places

2008-11-20T12:06:00.000-08:00

Okay this is kinda funny. And I warn you its a little on the edgy side.

Today I got an e-mail from a friend who asked me about the local effects of the proposed boycott of those businesses and individuals who supported Prop 8 in my community. I told him honestly I didn't anticipate to much of a backlash as I'm from a pretty conservative area. He asked me if I had seen the local list. This guy isn't LDS and he's out and all that. I said no, so he sent me a link.

Against my better judgment, I was directed to a classified weblist, you can figure out which one it was, it belongs to Criag. The link was listed under man for man in my area. The post was "Prop 8."

I read the list. It had the names, home addresses and phone numbers as well as businesses owned by my former stake president, various counsilers, lots of friends, people from the neighboring stakes and such. Bishops, regular members and people who I would never have guessed would have contributed. The donations ranged from a couple $5,000 ones to $200. Then I saw it. My best friends mom who is also a pretty good friend of mine was there.

This was a moment I couldn't resist. I quickly called her. She owns a car lot. She had made a contribution, I figured she had as I almost broke my neck helping her hang a big sign on her lot.

The conversation went like this.

"Hay, do you know your name is on a gay men's hook-up site?" There was silence. Then "What???" I started to laugh. A coworker who is also LDS and who was reading the list, also started to laugh. "Yeah, on (this list that belongs to Craig that I won't name) your name and address and phone number is listed under men seeking men.

"What are you talking about?" I told her to check her e-mail. She did and a few seconds later she started to laugh and then she must have clicked out of that post and on to an other and I'm only assuming the next post had a picture, because she suddenly said "YUCK!" and then said she logged off.

Two seconds later she came over to my office. Her lot is across the street and my coworker and I were laughing. "Oh my heck, I can't wait to tell your husband about the sites I find you on," said. She counters with, "Why were you on that site." Then we both started to laugh. "So I'm on the DIShonrable List huh?" she joked. There was a link on the post to a larger list that bore that title with more names.

Then it occurred to both of us. And this would be really, really funny if it wasn't really, really disturbing. "You know this is probably the only time in history that the names, addresses and phone numbers of the stake president and bishop will ever be listed on a gay hook-up site." LOL! Then we laughed some more.

I realize that this is an invasion of privacy, I also understand that its public info that you can get from the Sec of States office. She told me that for a few minutes she was outraged. Then she figured what the heck, she was doing what she felt was right, she was following the Prophets urging and if this is one of the dirty tricks the adversary wants to play so be it. In all reality it's pretty darn funny.

For the Record: The Church and the IRS

2008-11-17T20:17:00.000-08:00

The First Amendment guarantees (1) the free exercise religion, and (2) the right of free speech. In its limited political involvement on moral issues, the Church acts within the protection of the First Amendment.

Under Section 501 (c) (3) of the Internal Revenue Code, tax-exempt organizations such at The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are allowed to be involved in political issues and maintain their tax exemption as long as (1) their involvement is not a substantial part of their total activities, and (2) they do not participate or intervene in political campaigns on behalf of or in oppositions to any candidate for public office.

The Church clearly meets the requirements for tax-exempt organizations. Its involvement with political issues is rare and does not involve a significant fraction of its total activities and assets when one considers the substantial resources committed by the church to missionary work, temple and meeting house building and maintenance, family history, education, etc. Further, the Church maintains strict neutrality regarding political candidates.

This should lay to rest any assertions that the Church's efforts in support of traditional marriage are in violation of the IRS Tax Code.

First Presidency Urges Respect, Civility in Public Discourse

2008-11-14T13:13:00.000-08:00

SALT LAKE CITY - Five months ago, the First Presidency of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints sent a letter to members of the Church in California, encouraging them to join the millions of other Californians from many religious denominations, ethnic groups and political persuasions in a broad coalition to defend marriage as it has been defined for millennia.

During the election campaign, both sides of the argument on Proposition 8 had ample opportunities to express their viewpoint. The result was conclusively in favor of traditional marriage. More than 40 states in the United States have now voted to protect traditional marriage, either directly or through their elected representatives.

Today the First Presidency issued this statement about the democratic process:

Since the people of California voted to reaffirm the sanctity of traditional marriage between a man and a woman on November 4, 2008, places of worship have been targeted by opponents of Proposition 8 with demonstrations and, in some cases, vandalism. People of faith have been intimidated for simply exercising their democratic rights. These are not actions that are worthy of the democratic ideals of our nation. The end of a free and fair election should not be the beginning of a hostile response in America.

The Church is keenly aware of the differences of opinion on this difficult and sensitive matter. The reasons for this principled stand in defense of marriage have already been articulated elsewhere. However, some of what we have seen since Californians voted to pass Proposition 8 has been deeply disappointing.

Attacks on churches and intimidation of people of faith have no place in civil discourse over controversial issues. People of faith have a democratic right to express their views in the public square without fear of reprisal. Efforts to force citizens out of public discussion should be deplored by people of goodwill everywhere.

We call upon those who have honest disagreements on this issue to urge restraint upon the extreme actions of a few that are further polarizing our communities and urge them to act in a spirit of mutual respect and civility towards each other.

THIS IS NOT PART OF THE STATEMENT FROM THE FIRST PRESIDENCY BUT IT IS GOOD ADVICE:

As all of you know, the protests from the No on 8 side will continue this weekend.

We have been counseled not to hold counter-demonstrations. The other side will be looking for confrontations and if they get them, guess how the attending media will spin villains and victims?

Stay away from the demonstrations and let the police handle things. Especially encourage our most passionate supporters to stay at home. The more the other side demonstrates, the more their temper tantrums help us.

Let's not do anything that detracts from their visual stupidity.

Keep things in perspective: We can paint over graffiti on our buildings and we can plant new flowers on our temple grounds, but it's more difficult to repair a reputation that has been tarnished because some member loses his temper.

Be patient and kind. Turn the other cheek. This too shall pass.

Mormons and Prop 8: The facts

2008-11-09T23:53:00.000-08:00

Mormons make up less than 2 percent of the population of California. There are approximately 800,000 LDS out of a total population of approximately 34 million. Mormon voters were less than 5% of the yes vote. If one estimates that 250,000 LDS are registered voters (the rest being children), then LDS voters made up 4.6 percent of the Yes vote and 2.4 percent of the total Proposition 8 vote.

The No on 8 campaign raised more money than the Yes on 8 campaign. Unofficial estimates put No on 8 at $38 million and Yes on 8 at $32 million, making it the most expensive non-presidential election in the country.

Advertising messages for the Yes on 8 campaign are based on case law and real-life situations. The No on 8 supporters have insisted that the Yes on 8 messaging is based on lies. Every Yes on 8 claim is supported.

African Americans overwhelmingly supported Yes on 8. Exit polls show that 70 percent of Black voters chose Yes on 8. This was interesting because the majority of these voters voted for President-elect Obama. No on 8 supporters had assumed that Obama voters would vote No on 8.

The majority of Latino voters voted Yes on 8. Exit polls show that the majority of Latinos supported Yes on 8 and cited religious beliefs (assumed to be primarily Catholic).

The Yes on 8 coalition was a broad spectrum of religious organizations. Catholics, Evangelicals, Protestants, Orthodox Jews, Muslims - all supported Yes on 8. It is estimated that there are 10 million Catholics and 10 million Protestants in California. Mormons were a tiny fraction of the population represented by Yes on 8 coalition members.

Not all Mormons voted in favor of Proposition 8. Our faith accords that each person be allowed to choose for him or her self. Church leaders have asked members to treat other members with "civility, respect and love," despite their differing views.

The Church did not violate the principal of separation of church and state. This principle is derived from the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, which reads, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . ."

The phrase "separation of church and state," which does not appear in the Constitution itself, is generally traced to an 1802 letter by Thomas Jefferson, although it has since been quoted in several opinions handed down by the United States Supreme Court in recent years. The LDS Church is under no obligation to refrain from participating in the political process, to the extent permitted by law. U.S. election law is very clear that churches may not endorse candidates, but may support issues. The Church has always been very careful on this matter and occasionally (not often) chooses to support causes that it feels to be of a moral nature.

Supporters of Proposition 8 did exactly what the Constitution provides for all citizens: they exercised their First Amendment rights to speak out on an issue that concerned them, make contributions to a cause that they support, and then vote in the regular electoral process.

This has been done in an open, fair, and civil way. Opponents of 8 have accused supporters of being bigots, liars, and worse.

The fact is, we simply did what Americans do - we spoke up, we campaigned, and we voted.

Protesters, Prop 8 and comments

2008-11-08T13:23:00.000-08:00

...I guess you're refusing to apologize for being a bigot. It is hateful and wrong. Mormons should know better, and we will make it painful until they do. I'm planning on protesting a lot. And making t-shirts with the garment symbols on them....

This was left as a comment on my last blog.

Another reader felt that while it's unfair to judge all gay people by the acts of a few stereotypical ones, its okay to judge all Mormons for the acts of one Utah resident who burned a flag of a neighbor who supported Obama. We don't know if that person is LDS. We are assuming this because they are from Utah. And even so apparently this is representative of ALL Mormons. He also goes on to talk about how the church should change its doctrines to make life easier for those who can't follow the commandments. I guess the concept here is if we water down and make the commandments easier then more people will follow them and be happy. Feeling happy is apparently more important then actually being happy. Of course he uses the emotional loaded word suicide which of course makes anyone who comments about this sound heartless.

My statement to the first comment is this. Go right ahead and do it. I don't care. Do you really think its going to further your cause or make Mormons feel sorry for you and change their minds?

At this point both sides have their extremes. The real issue here is that these protests are going to polarize the middle. The people who may feel that "okay its wrong but they have rights" when they begin to feel attacked when they see their sacred symbols attacked or they see their LDS neighbors who they know aren't bigots maligned, they are going to act. They are feeling pushed.

This bothers me personally because it will only lead to further stereotyping on both sides. This will lead to further conflict. And those of us in the middle will end up losing on both ends.

Be Not Ashamed: Some post Prop 8 thoughts

2008-11-07T04:25:00.000-08:00

I have stayed silent for a few days now after the election for a number of reasons.

BUT I am now going to speak up for those of us who feel that our active support of Prop 8 equates to hate or intolerance at worst or blindly following the Prophet at best. I haven't really heard of much gloating from members of my ward or stake. Yes they are happy because the did work hard. But I don't think it can even be defined as gloating.

For those of us who feel that the Proclamation to the World is an inspired declaration, for those of us in CA who worked on this, happiness over the passage of Prop 8 feels like we have done what the Prophet has asked to try to stem the things that would bring to pass the things that prophets past and present have warned against. At least for now its a relief.

I do object to those who say that we shouldn't be well pleased with the results. Those who jump to this statement need to remember that participating in this hasn't been easy for any of us. For many of us this victory is representative of countless hours of work involving: knocking on doors, calling people, talking to people, placing signs etc. For those of us who struggle with Same Gender Attraction this was especially hard.

Those of us who struggle understand what our brothers and sisters who may choose not to live according to the gospel plan feel. But I want to make an observation. I am fairly sure that when Nephi and company found out that the city had been conquered and enslaved after they packed up and left, that they didn't gloat about their choice to follow God's "urging" to leave. I'm pretty sure that when Noah and his family brought up the gangplank on the ark amidst the jeering of their friends only to have to listen to them begging and pleading to let them in when the floods started. I'm sure they didn't stand on the deck of the ship saying "I told you so, too bad."

I'm sure they felt bad and they cried because of the choices of their beloved friends and neighbors who choose to use their agency in a way that was in opposition to what they had been urged to do. They loved them and felt bad that their choices had separated them from God. I'm sure they mourned them the same way we mourned the loss of a 1/3 of our brothers and sisters as a result of them following Satan in the war in heaven. But feeling bad about that didn't keep us from going forward with our choice to follow our Heavenly Father.

I'm not going to argue here rather choosing to follow the Prophet's call to action over this issue represented following the Prophet or not. The First Presidency in a letter and two apostles in a broadcast issues a clear call. But that is up to the individual, but what I am saying is that for those of us who did, we have nothing to apologize for. We did what we felt was right and we should never be ashamed of that. That doesn't mean we need to gloat over it. But we can walk away knowing that we did what we set out to do. For those who attended the broadcast as Elder Ballard and Elder Cook stressed we were engaged in the Lord's work. Those were his words, not mine.

When my bishop asked me to serve as our wards Zip Code Coordinator I admit that I had to struggle with it. On one hand it was something I knew I could do. I've had experience organizing past involvement in local, state and national campaigns. I love doing it. I could do this. Then he told me that he understands I struggle and that was the main reason he wanted my help because he felt that I could help with this and have the correct understanding of why we are doing this. I prayed about this and felt that it was the right thing to do.

The first thing I did was order enough copies of "The Lord Loveth His Children" and everyone of my volunteers received one when they came on board. I will say that none of my organizational meetings were homophobic, I will say that at least in none of the priesthood meetings I attended were stupid things said and if they were they were shot down by the majority. This was a fantastic opportunity to teach correct principles. From day one I made sure everyone involved knew what this was about and what it wasn't about.

I have lost friends over this. I've had longtime friends tell me that I was hateful, intolerant, ignorant and homophobic. I've been called sick. I've had people remove me from Myspace and Facebook. I've had friends send me letters and text messages telling me to never talk to them again. Within my own family my little brother is currently not speaking to my dad. I've had my faith, my church and my beliefs challenged. I have several good friends who were so emotionally disturbed by protesters at the Oakland Temple that they came home in tears. Yes, I've had my yard signs stolen, and my car keyed over my bumper sticker. Ironicly these are all the actions of so called tolerant people. As I write this I am watching a broadcast on the news about riots in front of the LA Temple and plans for a similar protest on Temple Square.

Yes we need to be more loving and more understanding. But we don't have to be ashamed of it. We don't have to apologize for what we believe in order to make those who choose to sin feel more loved or accepted. We don't have to accept the sin in order to love the sinner. I don't have to go to gay clubs to show my gay friends that I accept them as people. I don't have to attend gay pride parades to demonstrate that I accept their choices. I don't have to have an online presence on gay.com or connextions to show that while I don't choose to engage in the lifestyle, I am okay with those who do. I don't have to surround myself with immorality in order to prove that I'm tolerant.

Standing for something means taking a stand and this sometimes means having to walk away from things that would influence me to make bad choices. Being tolerant never means having to put myself in spiritually hazardous situations.

I refuse to apologize for standing up for what I think is right. I refuse to apologize for making the difficult choice to follow the Prophet. I refuse to apologize for my faith and my beliefs. I am not ashamed nor do I feel that I need to hide it. If 5,000 people can rally and riot in front of the LA Temple, climb all over the walls, engage in inappropriate and publicly sexual behavior in order to "punish" by shocking Mormons on their own terf. Perhaps those who are good friends with these people should tell them that they need to also question their actions.

Tolerance goes two ways. I can accept if my friends feel a need to live their lives in a way that goes against what I believe. BUT I also expect them to accept my beliefs and accept my opinions as well. Real tolerance goes both ways. I think thats a concept that has been forgotten in this whole deal.

I want to leave a few thoughts here.

* This evening I saw a news broadcast that put all the blame on the passage of this on the shoulders of the Mormon Church. One guy is urged all gay people to not stay at Marriot Hotels. Another was saying how they need to do everything they can to discredit Mitt Romney so as to cripple his chances to run for president. One guy was saying that they should get the list of names off the mormonsforprop8 site and blacklist businesses and shame them out of their elected offices and whatnot. Apparently the 2.5 percent of the Mormon Church population about 750,000 are the ones to blame here. To be honest I only wish for our missionary efforts we were this influential.

* Remember that while we worked on a broad based, grass roots organization, many of those who worked along side us have no use for Mormons in general. We are still a cult. We had a huge bus rally in my area that was planned at the Baptist Church. At first the Church wasn't even contacted to participated. We seemed to have been viewed as a necessary evil in the end when we received an invite. Oddly about 75 percent of the large crowd of 700 people were LDS.

* With the election of Obama, this nations seems to have thrown out the conservative view point. Other races indicate that the influence of the Religious Right is decreasing. Yet Prop 8 in CA, Prop 207 in AZ, Measure 2 in FL and a similar measure in AR all passed. For the record 7 in 10 black males voted for Prop 8 in CA. This is something to think about.

* There was a lot of attacks on the church for using so called scare tactics and half truths. A lot of which translated into "I don't like the facts presented and refuse to accept them." But at the eleventh hour a commercial depicting two Mormon Elders invading a home was aired and the same people who cried foul about the Yes on 8's tactics are now seeing justifications for this new ad. Either that or they claimed that it wasn't really part of what the mainstream No on 8 crowd agreed on.

* One final observation. Did anyone notice just how not gay or at least non-sterotypical the lesbian couple looked in that ad. To be honest the two Mormon Elders appeared more gay looking then the couple. This brings up a point. In any of the ads for No on 8 how much homosexuality was depicted? None. It was all about civil rights and texts and attacks on the facts used by the Yes on 8 side. The clear and simple fact was that the No on 8 people knew that to publicly own their cause would present an image problem. They knew that pictures same gender affection by in large makes people uncomfortable. While most people want to think of themselves as tolerant, they also don't want to see things that make them feel uncomfortable. Judging by the votes in CA, FL, AR, and AZ this seems to ring true.

Church Responds to Same-Sex

2008-11-05T19:59:00.000-08:00

SALT LAKE CITY - Since Proposition 8 was placed on the ballot in June of this year, the citizens of California have considered the arguments for and against same-sex marriage. After extensive debate between those of different persuasions, voters have chosen to amend the California State Constitution to state that marriage should be between a man and a woman.

Voters in Arizona and Florida took the same course and amended their constitutions to establish that marriage will continue to be between a man and a woman.

Such an emotionally charged issue concerning the most personal and cherished aspects of life — family, identity, intimacy and equality — stirs fervent and deep feelings.

Most likely, the election results for these constitutional amendments will not mean an end to the debate over same-sex marriage in this country.

We hope that now and in the future all parties involved in this issue will be well informed and act in a spirit of mutual respect and civility toward those with a different position. No one on any side of the question should be vilified, intimidated, harassed or subject to erroneous information.

It is important to understand that this issue for the Church has always been about the sacred and divine institution of marriage — a union between a man and a woman.

Allegations of bigotry or persecution made against the Church were and are simply wrong. The Church’s opposition to same-sex marriage neither constitutes nor condones any kind of hostility toward gays and lesbians. Even more, the Church does not object to rights for same-sex couples regarding hospitalization and medical care, fair housing and employment rights, or probate rights, so long as these do not infringe on the integrity of the traditional family or the constitutional rights of churches.

Some, however, have mistakenly asserted that churches should not ever be involved in politics when moral issues are involved. In fact, churches and religious organizations are well within their constitutional rights to speak out and be engaged in the many moral and ethical problems facing society. While the Church does not endorse candidates or platforms, it does reserve the right to speak out on important issues.

Before it accepted the invitation to join broad-based coalitions for the amendments, the Church knew that some of its members would choose not to support its position. Voting choices by Latter-day Saints, like all other people, are influenced by their own unique experiences and circumstances. As we move forward from the election, Church members need to be understanding and accepting of each other and work together for a better society.

Even though the democratic process can be demanding and difficult, Latter-day Saints are profoundly grateful for and respect the ideals of a true democracy.

The Church expresses deep appreciation for the hard work and dedication of the many Latter-day Saints and others who supported the coalitions in efforts regarding these amendments.

No on 8 ad shows Mormon Missionaries as home invaders

2008-11-03T23:59:00.000-08:00

File this under can they sink any lower?

After months of accusing the Yes on 8 people of using "so called scare tactics" it looks like our tolerant friends have shown their true colors. This ad will appear in CA in the Morning.

It is true that the Church has joined a broad-based coalition in defense of traditional marriage. Church spokesman Scott Trotter said in response to this hateful attack "While we feel this is important to all of society, we have always emphasized that respect be given to those who feel differently on this issue. It is unfortunate that some who oppose this proposition have not given the Church this same courtesy."

I hope that you will join us today and show that we won't stand for this kind of stuff in California. We will send a message that judges can't overturn our votes. Please Vote YES on Prop 8.

The Thurston Paper: Mischaracterized in 'No on 8' Press Release

2008-11-01T16:17:00.000-07:00

LDS Lawyer's Commentary Mischaracterized in 'No on 8' Press Release

ORANGE COUNTY- A press release dated October 19 from a public relations firm representing 'No on 8' is inaccurate and misleading," says Morris A. Thurston, an LDS lawyer who was erroneously cited as having "debunked" new California Prop 8 ads.

More than a month ago, Thurston wrote a commentary on a document titled "Six Consequences ... if Prop 8 Fails." That document, unsigned and anonymous, had not been approved by the LDS Church, although it was being circulated by some local church members. "It contained certain misstatements about the consequences of Prop 8's failure," Thurston said, "so I wrote my commentary to correct these errors. To the best of my knowledge, the church has since discouraged its members from using anonymous documents such as this. It has never been posted on the official LDS Church website."

"The 'No on 8' press release is inaccurate in a number of respects," said Thurston.

"First, the release implies that I have 'debunked' a new television ad recently released by the Prop 8 campaign and that my commentary 'clearly states the Prop. 8 ads are based entirely on claims that are not true.' This is incorrect. I have never contended that all claims in television ads released by Prop 8 supporters are untrue or misleading and I have not seen the new ad.

"Second, the release says that I have 'confirmed that Prop 8 has nothing to do with education.' This is also untrue. My commentary merely stated what the Los Angeles Times confirmed in its editorial published today -- that Prop 8 will not require teachers to promote gay marriage or to make any value judgment regarding the morality of same-sex marriage compared to traditional marriage.

"Third, the release links my commentary to a claim that 'the Mormon Church has asked its members to fund a campaign based on these lies.' I have never contended that the LDS Church or its leaders have lied in this campaign. In fact, I took pains to point out that the church had not authored or approved the 'Six Consequences' document that my commentary discussed.

"Finally, the release refers to me as a 'professor at BYU Law School.' I am not a full professor, as the release implies, but an 'adjunct' (or part-time) professor. An early draft of my commentary listed my adjunct professorship among my qualifications, but I subsequently removed that reference from the authorized version of the commentary. The 'No on 8' campaign has posted an unauthorized early draft. I want to emphasize that I removed the reference to my BYU Law School affiliation on my own volition and that I have not been asked by the LDS Church or the Law School to do so. I removed it because I considered it irrelevant. What I teach at BYU Law School has nothing to do with equal rights, religious freedom or California education law. In writing my commentary I was doing so as a lawyer who has spent considerable time researching the issues, not as a law professor.

"The primary reason I wrote my commentary was to help keep the campaign honest. I am an active member of the LDS Church and a strong supporter of equal rights for gays and lesbians. It is regrettable that the 'No on 8' campaign has issued a release that mischaracterizes my commentary and my views. I assume that the mistakes were inadvertent and that steps will promptly be taken to remove the website posting."
SOURCE Morris A. Thurston

Stoning Mormons for standing up for their values

2008-11-01T16:06:00.000-07:00

Large crowds of Anti-Prop 8 demonstrators have been protesting outside of The Oakland CA Temple and other CA temples of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints the past few weeks.

Stoning Mormons for standing up for their values by funding Prop. 8
Dennis Wyatt
Managing Editor
Mantica Bulletin

The scariest thing about Proposition 8 isn't what passage or failure to pass the measure will do. It is the unrelenting attack on Mormons for having the courage to not just espouse their beliefs and values but to put their money where their principles are.

Mormons - unlike Catholics and others who are contributing to the campaign to pass Proposition 8 on Tuesday's California ballot - are getting the Full Monty.

One such effort is the web site Mormonsfor8.com ran by those opposing Proposition 8 who are against the concept of marriage being strictly between a man and a woman. The site lists the name and hometown of every Mormon who has contributed to the Yes on 8 campaign.

The site is used by the Daily Kos - it definitely isn't a conservative blog - as part of a campaign to look into the personal lives of those Mormons backing the measure. It has led to incidents such in San Jose where the Sundstrom family that exercised their right to donate to the campaign had two women parked in front of their home in a SUV that had "bigots live here" painted on the windshield.

In the early going, those adamantly opposed to Proposition 8 attacked all religious groups that had contributed money including the Catholic Church. But as the election draws closer, they are showing their true bias and denouncing only Mormons.

Anti-Prop. 8 groups have taken to calling for the denouncing of the church for supporting a measure that basically reflects their values. Gee, is anyone denouncing the opponents of Prop. 8 who fund that campaign for their actions reflecting their values?

There have been efforts afoot to have the IRS delve into the church's tax status.

The Mormons haven't crossed the line. Even so, separation of church and state in the context of this nation's founding wasn't to prevent churches from being active in politics but to keep the state from creating a church such as Henry VIII did when he created the Church of England because the Pope wouldn't change the tenets of the Catholic faith to fit his decrees.

Its not a good idea to have a government in control of secular and spiritual thoughts unless, of course, you loved the old USSR model. The only way those two can work in concert is to suppress the idea of individual freedoms. And when you're doing that, you can't just take away the right of religious freedom to make it work.

Even so, it's a free country. Those who oppose Proposition 8 are free to harass and do what they want as long as they don't cross the line. The goal of their campaign, obviously, is to make people fearful of expressing their views and doing so in the public arena that counts - elections.

Lecturing the Mormon Church, though, about the importance of the separation of church and state is like lecturing Jews about the dangers of totalitarian regimes.

The Mormons are historically the most persecuted religion in the United States.

What brought down the wrath of Congress to pass a law going after the Mormons? Yes, polygamy was part of it but when push came to shove it was the entire faith that irked the powers that be.

The Mormons had been chased from New York and Illinois.

The church's Relief Society - long before it was the fashion -campaigned for women's rights. In 1870, Utah became the first state to give women the right to vote. The Mormon faith blossomed with one important caveat - not all Mormons by far were polygamists.

Congress in 1882 passed the Edmunds Act to outlaw cohabitation with more than one woman. President Arthur sent federal agents to Utah. In clear violation of the U.S. constitutional law forbidding de facto laws, all Mormons who practiced polygamy were disenfranchised, stripped of the right to vote and many jailed. Idaho in 1885 put in effect a loyalty oath requiring all residents to swear they opposed polygamy or any organization that taught it in order to vote to effectively disenfranchise all Mormons even if they didn't practice polygamy.

Congress in 1887 passed the Edmunds-Tucker Act to break up the Mormon Church and seize all of its property. It required loyalty oaths from local officials, which kept even Mormons not practicing polygamy from holding office, and gave the government the say in what textbooks could be allowed in classrooms.

Many thousands of Mormons were imprisoned.

Congress sent the U.S. Army to attack the Mormons. Why? Because 140 non-Mormon settlers - many who had abused local Indians - were massacred by the Indians at Mountain Meadows. Newspapers urged the government to invade Utah on the false assumption the Mormons were behind the attack.

Yes, the Mormon Church excommunicates gays.

Mormons in the 19th century - and by many today - aren't cut slack for their faith and are painted with a wide brush. The church has never advocated the stoning of gays. And under Proposition 8, they are expressing their belief marriage is between a man and a woman. It is the church's right as to the status of the openly gay in their own church. It's call free association. It's called freedom of religion

Branding Mormons for the practice of polygamy that was abandoned over a hundred years ago by all but a handful of fringe former church members who believe they're the true Mormons makes them an easy target in the mind of some.

It is no different, however, than those who bash gays on old premises and prejudices.

Unless the highest court in this land or Congress itself makes it clear that it isn't the case, the issue of defining a marriage is a right reserved to the states.

Bashing the Mormons for doing what is clearly legal within the framework of the laws of this land - campaigning to protect a marriage as they define it - is just plain wrong.

Summer is Nigh, following the Prophet

2008-10-31T15:11:00.000-07:00

The following is a quote attributed to Elder Neal A. Maxwell. It was sent to me from a Stake President in Southern California. It's funny how these things work. Given current events I've been spending a lot of time studying this topic and I prayed for something that bridged the gap between what I feeling and what I was finding in reading and praying. These kind of spiritual nuggets of gold seem to come up only when you are searching for them and they come in the most unexpected way. Anyways I wanted to share this with the group.

"Make no mistake about it, brothers and sisters, in the months and years ahead, events are likely to require each member to decide whether or not he will follow the First Presidency. Members will find it more difficult to halt longer between two opinions. President Marion G. Romney said, many years ago, that he had 'never hesitated to follow the counsel of the Authorities of the Church even though it crossed my social, professional or political life."

"This is hard doctrine, but it is particularly vital doctrine in a society which is becoming more wicked. In short, brothers and sisters, not being ashamed of the gospel of Jesus Christ includes not being ashamed of the prophets of Jesus Christ. . . . Your discipleship may see the time when such religious convictions are discounted. . . . This new irreligious imperialism seeks to disallow certain opinions simply because those opinions grow out of religious convictions.

"Resistance to abortion will be seen as primitive. Concern over the institution of the family will be viewed as untrendy and unenlightened .... Before the ultimate victory of the forces of righteousness, some skirmishes will be lost. Even in these, however, let us leave a record so that the choices are clear, letting others do as they will in the face of prophetic counsel. There will also be times, happily, when a minor defeat seems probable, but others will step forward, having been rallied to rightness by what we do. We will know the joy, on occasion, of having awakened a slumbering majority of the decent people of all races and creeds which was, till then, unconscious of itself. Jesus said that when the fig trees put forth their leaves,'summer is nigh.' Thus warned that summer is upon us, let us not then complain of the heat."

How we're tolerant people AND voting yes on Prop 8

2008-10-27T23:55:00.001-07:00

This pretty much sums up how I feel on this issue. Its a hard one, but one I've carefully pondered and have thought out. Please watch this video before you make your decision on election day.

SURPRISE - PROP 8 SUPPORTS FREEDOM

2008-10-27T23:40:00.000-07:00

PROP 8 RESEARCH – EFFECTS OF GAY MARRIAGE IN CANADA AND MASSACHUSETTS

SURPRISE - PROP 8 SUPPORTS FREEDOM - THE BATTLE FOR FREEDOM OF SPEECH

By William Clayton | JD/MBA Candidate
Stanford Graduate School of Business
Yale Law School

For most Americans, freedom is the paramount value. Preferring to live and let live, Americans naturally tend to oppose Proposition 8 believing that it restricts freedom. But a careful study of what has happened to freedom in countries and states where gay marriage has been legalized strongly supports exactly the opposite conclusion.

Laws frequently have unforeseen consequences. Such is the case with gay marriage. A study of the effects of the judicial imposition of gay marriage on the people of Canada and Massachusetts provides a clear picture of how it is destroying freedom of speech and threatens our very democratic way of life. Surprisingly, passage of Proposition 8 will actually strengthen our freedoms. Please don’t vote before taking time to carefully consider the following information to assist you in making up you mind about Proposition 8. Those who truly love freedom cannot afford to make a quick emotional decision about Proposition 8.

Most gays, particularly those who want to marry, are respectful of others views, but the activist Gay Lobby, that is driving the legal battles, has a very different agenda. A study of the world wide consequences of legalization of gay marriage, with particular attention to Canada and Massachusetts, clearly demonstrates that the agenda of the activist Gay Lobby is not granting homosexuals the legal rights associated with marriage but harnessing the power of the state to transform society into their image and suppressing all opposing views. The legal record shows that, given the opportunity they will force their views upon everyone else, including and especially young children. Their objective, as clearly seen in the legal actions taken and the instructional materials being used in the elementary schools, is not tolerance but celebration of homosexuality and “gay pride” while teaching that opposing views are mean spirited and hateful bigotry. And their attack extents beyond government supported institutions to private and home schools as they seek to deny parents the right to control the moral teaching of their children.

Society has rightfully removed the teaching of religion from the public schools, but the Gay Lobby seeks to use the courts to force the teaching of a new religion in the schools, the “religion” of gay activism. It is a religion of intolerance that has subjected those who voiced differing beliefs to ridicule, termination of employment, and even civil and criminal action for “hate” speech. To the Gay Lobby, separation of church and state means keeping the views of religions that disagree with their life style out of schools and government, while demanding that those same schools and government use tax payer dollars to teach their “religion” to young children and deny religious adoption agencies the right to direct children into homes with both a mother and a father. If left unchecked, their attack on freedom of speech will lead to the destruction of democracy in the name of tolerance.

Failure to pass Proposition 8 will give the Gay Lobby a potent legal weapon that will be wielded in California as it has been in Canada and Massachusetts . It will be used to promote the transformation of society and the suppression of freedom of speech. If this statement seems absurd, you owe it to yourself and your children and grandchildren who will have to live in the country you create with your vote to study this material carefully before voting.

GAYS ALREADY HAVE ALL RIGHTS OF MARRIED COUPLES UNDER CALIFORNIA LAW

Passage of Proposition 8 does not deny gays any rights under California state law. The Domestic Partners Act has already granted to gays all the rights of heterosexual spouses under state law. This Act, originally passed in 1999 and modified and expanded in subsequent years, culminated in the California Domestic Partners Rights and Responsibilities Act of 2003, states its intent “to secure to eligible couples . . . the full range of legal rights, protections and benefits, as well as all of the responsibilities, obligations, and duties to each other, to their children, to third parties and to the State, as the laws of California extend to and impose upon spouses.” The final draft, under Family Code Section 297.5, provides that: “Registered domestic partners shall have the same rights, protections, and benefits, and shall be subject to the same responsibilities, obligations, and duties under law, whether they derive from statutes, administrative regulations, court rules, government policies, common law, or any other provisions or sources of law, as are granted to and imposed upon spouses.” And in Koebke v. Bermuda Heights Country Club, the California Supreme Court concluded, “a chief goal of the Domestic Partner Act is to equalize the status of registered domestic partners and married couples.” Consequently, gays already have all the rights and responsibilities of heterosexual couples under State law. Although there are some federal tax limitations based on the definition of spouses, those will no doubt be changed by the federal government in the near future without the need of redefining marriage.

NOT ABOUT EQUAL RIGHTS

So, if it is not about equal rights, what is it about? Why are the gay activists so focused on acquiring the word “marriage”? A look at what has happened in the states and countries that have bestowed that simple word on Domestic Partners is instructive. As so often happens, an apparently simple change in the law can have far reaching and unintended consequences. At least the consequences are unintended for those who unknowingly vote in favor of what seems like a simple question of granting others the right to live their lives the way they want.

A review of the consequences of the judicial imposition of “gay marriage” on the citizens of Massachusetts and the track record of government action in Canada show that, although the argument in favor of gay marriage is couched in terms of tolerance and freedom, the consequence of permitting gay marriage has been the exact opposite.

CANADIAN EXPERIENCE

In Canada, the granting gays the right to marry is being used as an excuse for an all out assault on free speech and religious freedom, attacking any with opposing views as bigots engaged in “hate” speech. The shocking depth of this attack is chronicled by Hans C. Clausen, former Editor in Chief of the Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, in his 66 page report published March 1, 2005 : (highlights added)

The "privilege of speech" in a "pleasantly authoritarian country": how Canada 's judiciary allowed laws proscribing discourse critical of homosexuality to trump free speech and religious liberty.

http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-6559580_ITM

In this scholarly report, the Author examines Canada 's extensive legal regime prohibiting speech critical of homosexuality, illustrating how the Canadian judiciary's zeal for promoting the social acceptance of homosexuality has greatly diminished fundamental legal protections for open discourse and religious liberty. The introduction begins,

Giving credence to Alexis de Tocqueville's argument that in democratic societies the love of equality is greater than the love of freedomis a recently emerging trend among Western nations to legally proscribe speech critical of homosexuality. Such laws, in various forms, now exist in a large and growing minority of countries in Europe and North America . The goal of these laws is much grander than preventing discrimination against homosexuals; rather, the objective is seemingly to promote the social acceptance of gay and lesbian lifestyles.These laws provide for civil remedies and in some instances even criminal sanctions for speech considered offensive or degrading to homosexuals, and constitutional-rights objections to them--on the basis of speech and religious liberty guarantees--have been largely unavailing. Thus, achieving the social equality of homosexuals--conceived in sweeping terms--has, in many Western countries, outstripped legal protections for speech and religious freedoms.

Among other examples, Mr. Clausen describes the discipline of a Canadian teacher, Chris Kempling, who acted privately to address legitimate concerns about material he was being forced to distribute to his students.

Kempling, a public high school teacher and counselor, was initially suspended from his job for five months without pay (15) by the province's educational accreditation board for writing letters to the editor (16)--printed in the local newspaper, (17) but never introduced into any public school or classroom (18)--that argued, on the basis of scientific and scholarly research, (19) that homosexual relationships are unstable and gay sex risky. (20) He also criticized what he viewed as the pro-gay stance of the public education system. (21)

Kempling started writing his letters after being asked by presenters at a government-sponsored workshop to distribute copies of a gay-and-lesbian newspaper--which included advertisements for gay bathhouses, pornographic personal ads, and information about joining casual-sex and masturbation clubs--to students at his school. (22) He initially complained directly to his union and to the Minister of Education, but his complaints were ignored. (23) "When I realized that no one in authority was prepared to take any action, I decided to educate myself, and start writing directly to the public, to make parents aware of what was being proposed for their children," Kempling said. (24)

When the accreditation board learned of Kempling's letters, it launched a full inquiry: a government investigator was dispatched to Kempling's small town and was soon speaking with community leaders and Kempling's supervisors and colleagues. (25) Not long thereafter, Kempling--a thirteen-year employee of the public school system with an exemplary record (26)--found himself suspended and lacking support from his peers, his bosses, his union, (27) and even the B.C. Civil Liberties Union. (28) Although no evidence existed that Kempling's letters caused any disturbance or controversy at his school (29)--nor did any students or parents complain of Kempling's letters or job performance (30)--the B.C. Supreme Court upheld the accreditation board's decision to suspend Kempling for writing his letters, stating that "the appellant's discriminatory expression is of low value ... [and] is incompatible with the search for truth." (31)

After describing Kempling's suspension from his teaching position for publicly expressing his views on homosexuality, Clausen then mentions several other countries that have criminalized remarks critical of homosexuality: New Zealand , South Africa , Netherlands and Denmark . In 2004, the Canadian Parliament passed C-250, sponsored by gay legislator Svend Robinson. The legislation added "sexual orientation" to the list of protected minority categories in Canadian law. Because of this new law, religious leaders are fearful of speaking out against homosexuality and, notes Clausen, "Academicians also seem to be feeling the effect: some university professors are scared that the law will threaten free inquiry in the classroom and in their own publications." In one legal case, a Canadian court justified its suppression of free speech because it claimed that criticism of gays impacted an individual's sense of "self-worth and acceptance." The court also listed "self- fulfillment," "self-autonomy," and "self-development," as reasons to suppress free speech in favor of gays. Clausen points out that this argument is seriously flawed because it favors the speech rights of one group over another. The court also claimed that criticism of homosexuality damaged the "dignity" of gays.

Clausen ends his discussion by observing that hate speech laws that suppress criticism of homosexuality, if taken to their logical conclusion, would "require the abolition of democracy itself" and "It reflects a deep lack of faith in citizens' ability to distinguish truth from error, faults the 'marketplace of ideas' as inadequate and even dangerous, and claims that the coercive force of government-in the form of hate speech laws-is the solution."

Anyone who truly wants to understand where we will be headed in California if Proposition 8 fails should spend some time reviewing this careful analysis that traces the development of the legal prohibition of free speech in Canada .

Attack on Private and Home Schools

In March 7, 2007 - Gay activist groups in Ontario urged the Provincial Ministry of Education to exert more control over private and home schools to fight against the alleged effects of homophobia, objecting to religious schools teaching “only their own values.” An article in Ottawa 's Capital Xtra written by Tony Lovink, who describes himself as a gay Christian school teacher, claimed that "All private schools tend to be at least implicitly homophobic. And I would say all religiously formed independent schools are definitely homophobia.”

The Coalition for Lesbian and Gay Rights in Ontario says it is concerned that the provincial ministry of education was failing to exert "more control" over the curriculum used by private religious schools. The coalition also objects to private schools hiring teachers based upon the school's own qualification requirements.

In October 2006, the Quebec government ordered private Christian schools to begin teaching sex education in compliance with the provincial curriculum. Schools failing to implement these materials were threatened with closure.

In British Columbia , gay activists Murray Corren and Peter Corren were granted power over the provincial school curriculum as part of a lawsuit settlement. The settlement also introduced a policy prohibiting parents from removing their children from the classroom when gay-affirmative materials were being taught.

Seek to Shut Down Pro-Family Websites

Gay activists have demanded that the Federal Human Rights Commissions shut down three pro-family web sites run by Craig Chandler, a Canadian conservative and talk-radio host.

MASSACHUSETTS EXPERIENCE

You might want to believe that things will be different in the United States , where we are supposedly protected by freedom of religion, but nothing could be further from the truth. The experience in Massachusetts since the courts granted gays the right to marry has been an unrelenting attack on freedom of speech and religion that appears to be accelerating, taking lessons from Canada about how to use the courts to destroy any opposition to the teaching of their “life style” to young children.

Training Video – Teaching Gay Pride in Schools

A primary objective of the Gay Lobby’s agenda is the indoctrination of young children, starting in kindergarten with the idea that being gay is wonderful and free. You may say this is just reactionary fear mongering but unfortunately it is true. The following training video for teachers shows what you can expect in our California elementary schools if gay marriage is allowed to stand and possibly even if it isn’t. It was created by Women's Educational Media, which states that, "Waiting to teach children to accept differences of all kinds until middle school or high school is too late…." In one segment, teachers discuss teaching homosexuality to children even if parent's have moral objections to it, concluding that it had to be taught regardless of parental objections. If you do nothing else to educate yourself about this issue, by all means view this training video and ask yourself if this is what you want happening in the earliest grades in our schools. In particular, notice the attitudes being instilled in young minds that any opposition to gay marriage or homosexuality is “mean” and “hateful” and the use of peer pressure to enforce that prejudice. Excerpts of this training video can be found at:

http://www.massresistance.org/media/video/brainwashing.html

Legal Actions Against Parents

The Massachusetts courts have also held that the schools have no requirement to notify parents when teaching about homosexuality even in Kindergarten.

In April 2008, David Parker, father of a kindergarten student at Estabrook Elementary School, in Lexington, Mass. spent a night in jail and was charged with criminal trespassing after refusing to leave a scheduled meeting with ofﬁcials at the school unless they provided parental notice of such lessons and gave him the option of pulling his child out of those classes.

The legal rights of parents to opt their children out of “gay pride” education has been smashed by the Massachusetts courts. U.S. District Judge Mark L. Wolf dismissed a civil rights lawsuit brought by David Parker, ordering that it is reasonable;indeed there is an obligation, for public schools to teach young children to accept and endorse homosexuality. Wolf essentially adopted the reasoning in a brief submitted by a number of homosexual-advocacy groups, who said "the rights of religious freedom and parental control over the upbringing of children … would undermine teaching and learning…"

Attack on Religious Adoption Agencies

Not satisfied with using the power of the state to force the teaching of their views and the ridiculing of opposing views in the schools, gay activists efforts have forced the Catholic Charities of Boston , begun in 1903, to cease its adoption services rather then comply with state law requiring placement of children with homosexual couples.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2006/03/11/catholic_charities_stuns_state_ends_adoptions/

TOLERANCE – NOT THE OBJECTIVE OF THE GAY LOBBY

Most people would like to let others live their lives as they please in the name of tolerance in the hope that their own freedom would be equally respected. As a result most Americans oppose the state interfering with what out to be personal decisions including whom one chooses to marry. But an analysis of the activist Gay Lobby’s legal agenda world wide indicates that their objective is not mutual tolerance but use of the power of state to force their views upon everyone else.

Many gays are tolerant and respectful of others views, but their legal activists are pursuing a very different course. Most gays, especially those who want to marry, simply want to be allowed the freedom to pursue their lives as they think best and that opportunity has been provided them through the Domestic Partners Act. Unfortunately, the Gay Lobby is not satisfied with tolerance of their alternate life style. While decrying “hate” speech, they are teaching it to young impressionable children in the schools, teaching them that anyone who believes that homosexuality is wrong is an ignorant bigot.

The Gay Lobby wants to silence all disagreement and attempts to do so by twisting words and terms. Christians are called hypocrites. Those with traditional morals or religious beliefs are called homophobic. Disagreement is called hate. Honest opponents are called bigots, hypocrites and “forces of darkness.” Teaching homosexuality to young children is called “preparing them to become engaged and productive citizens.”

From the actual history of the legally enforced implementation of “gay rights” in the schools and courts, it is clear that the objective of the Gay Lobby is not equality under the law but the reshaping of society into their own image. It is not teaching children tolerance of the gay lifestyle but teaching them to celebrate homosexuality and “gay pride” and the eradication of traditional values in the process. They use the law and the courts to threaten and harass anyone who disagrees with their views and to shut down freedom of speech and to deny parents the right to control the moral teaching of their children. Their onslaught against our most basic and essential freedom of speech must be stopped or it will lead to the destruction of democracy in the name of tolerance. Tolerance is a double-edged sword. It needs to cut both ways. The Gay Lobby’s view of tolerance is one sided, using the force of law to promote their views while exercising that same force to limit the freedom of those who disagree with them.

Granting gays the right to the word “marriage” gives the Gay Lobby a powerful weapon that they will wield in their fight to transform society as they have in Canada and Massachusetts . Proposition 8 does not deny gays any legal rights provided to married couples under California law, but it will slow down the activist Gay Lobby’s assault on our most basic freedoms of speech and religion.

For this reason, it is imperative that Proposition 8 be passed in order to deny these activists one of their most effective weapons with which to bludgeon our freedom of speech and religion, denying freedom of conscience and religion to all who disagree with their views.

Passage of Proposition 8 simply confirms that all people are free to exercise their freedom of speech, expression and religion; tolerance for all will continue to be taught in California schools; same-sex domestic partnerships will continue to provide all of the rights and benefits extended to married spouses; and, “marriage” will continue to be defined as it always has: a legal relationship between a man and a woman.

Don't Lose Heart! We Arn't Standing Alone!

2008-10-26T19:48:00.000-07:00

My Stake President sent this to me today with this note attached.

Putting a sign in your yard may make you a target but not like this.

"Sticks and stones my break my bones, but arrows will never hit me."

ONWARD! On to victory, President Y.

My new blog rules

2008-10-24T17:44:00.000-07:00

Okay people, here's the deal. I have been more then liberal and more then patient with the comments that I've allowed to be posted on my blog.

I have endured outright attacks on my faith and religion. I've allowed way to personal insults. I have been compared to Muslim extremists. I have had people come right out and tell me how much they disrespect me and what a closed minded bigot I am. I've been called a sheep who blindly follows. I've been called ignorant and hateful.

I've been told my church is false, my prophet false and my opinions out and out wrong.

Wow, talk about showing real tolerance and acceptance for someone that you disagree with.

The irony of this situation is that if I was to go on some of the blogs of the people who are so quick to attack me an my opinion and spout the stuff they are saying about me, I would either be deleted or blocked. There is no way that anyone of these so called liberal and freethinkers would allow me the sort of space that I've allowed them. Over and over again. I wonder what would happen if I went to your blogs and started posting links to LDS Church websites and such? I'll tell you what would happen. The lack of respect would be overwhelming. I've provided my critics with more space for them to spread their distorted and blatantly anti-mormon opinions then they would ever afford me.

If I was to say even half of the things I've allowed here but against your point of view you would jump to the up and scream hate speech but some how its okay for you to mock my faith, my beliefs and my opinions. You think its okay to defend your point of view as the correct one, but if I have the nerve to claim the same privalage you say that I'm a tool of an evil and repressive organization. That's hypocrisy clear and simple.

I don't mind if you disagree with me, and yes if you want to post a thoughtful response cool, we may not come to a consensus but we can still agree to disagree. But if you are going to call me a tool or some other name. If you are going to mock me or tell me how little you think of me. Please go somewhere else until you can practice the tolerance that you preach.

That is going to stop. I don't mind someone disagreeing with me, but there is a need for people to be civil.

I'm sure that some people will jump to their guns and say "You are trying to take away my rights so I will say anything I want." Well okay. Turn that around. Now that you've done that don't ever accuse anyone of hate speech. If your going to mock my church and my values which is your opinion, don't get mad at me when I tell you that in my opinion you are living or promoting a wicked lifestyle. If you don't like the way I vote, let me remind you that you have just as much a right to vote also.

I refuse to apologize for my beliefs or my testimony. I also refuse to continue to be a platform for you to twist the truth and do exactly the type of things you are accusing me of. If you can't be civil or at least attempt to be polite I would rather not hear what you have to say and you won't find your comment posted here.

Just a scare tactic? The evidence speaks for itself

2008-10-24T11:25:00.000-07:00

The battleground for Proposition 8 now centers around the indoctrination of children.

Opponents of Proposition 8 know children will be taught about homosexuality in the classroom and they're scared this issue will help pass Proposition 8.

We have all the evidence we need that taking over the classroom is the real goal:

Last week Californians were shocked to learn the California Teacher's Association-the state's largest teachers organization-had donated over one million dollars to the No on Proposition 8 campaign. With this donation, the CTA sided with the most radical anti-family forces.

Even after the public outrage over the CTA's million-dollar donation, they still gave more money against our families and our values with another donation days later.

Just this week the No on Proposition 8 campaign began airing a television ad featuring California's Superintendant of Public Instruction Jack O'Connell. Abusing the power and trust vested in him by the people of California, Superintendent O'Connell has the audacity to deceive voters about homosexuality being taught in the classroom.

How does he respond to a class of first graders being taken to a same-sex marriage ceremony in San Francisco?

Yesterday, a school in Hayward is holding a gay "Coming Out Day" for kindergartners.

And how can he explain the following email we received this week from the mother of a five-year-old girl in Southern California?

"Pray for me. I've just started this battle. Ashley brought home a book from Kindergarten that says 'All Families are different--- Some families have 2 mommies and some families have 2 daddies.' I went and talked to the teacher and she knew what was in the book and was ok with it. She said she'd ask the principal what the policy is. I will not let it go. I just hope the school sides with me."

This is exactly what we can expect in every school is we don't pass Proposition 8. The CTA is committed to indoctrinating our children with "values" contrary to our own and Superintendent O'Connell is now their willing accomplice.

This is how low it gets - Superstars comments

2008-10-23T15:16:00.000-07:00

After weeks of online debate over Prop 8, and both sides having their reason for why or why not the other side is using scare tactics, lies, and misrepresentations to further their cause. I posted the following which for me is the main reason. Of course I was instantly attacked by people who accused me of not praying for a spiritual confirmation. Which for the record I have and received. I was attacked for being a closed minded sheep. Well okay, then I will say in my defense that I know who my shepherd is and I will gladly follow him. Here is what I wrote.

But the final bottom line here is this. I am a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I sustain the Prophet. When the Prophet speaks as the Prophet then I know that following him is what the Lord wants me to do. I need to put aside my own doubts and fears and have faith in him who God speaks through. Even if you toss out all the other reasons to support Prop 8. That is the single, most important reason. Because the Lord has asked me to. That's as clear a request as I can give.

We can't let our own feelings and emotions, wants and desires cloud what is clearly stated by the Lords Prophet. I don't call that blind faith, I call that faith.

Today this in response "Superstar" whomever he or she is sent me the following.

Just a little word substitution to show you how religious belief can get in the way of rights of the people:

"I sustain [Allah]. When [Allah] speaks as [Allah] then I know that following him is what [Allah] wants me to do. I need to put aside my own doubts and fears and have faith in him whom [Allah] speaks through. Even if you toss out all the other reasons to support [death to all Americans]. That is the single, most important reason. Because [Allah] has asked me to. That's as clear a request as I can give.

We can't let our own feelings and emotions, wants and desires cloud what is clearly stated by [Allah]. I don't call that blind faith, I call that faith."

He or she then added:

How is this any different from Proposition 8 and your fervent beliefs?

Okay first I've been very liberal about posting comments to my blogs, even if they disagree with my opinions, but I think this one is a little over the top.

First of all you are making an assumption that I am blindly following the Prophet. Secondly you are comparing all Latter-day Saints who do show their faithfulness to those who would resort to acts of violence to further their cause. Finally you are also now lumping all followers of Allah into one group of radical extremist that do this sort of thing. In all of the above your statements are as closed minded and bigoted as anything you've accuse me of being.

If you are a faithful member of the LDS Church part of that is sustaining the Prophet as Prophet, Seer and Revalator. When the Prophet issues a call to action, acting in his sacred calling as a the prophet, it is doing so under the direction of the Lord. Yes we should pray about it, but we also need to realize that having our own opinions about something doesn't count as spiritual confirmation that the Prophet is wrong. Sometimes we can be overwhelmed with our own emotions and not see the whole eternal picture. Sometimes Satan will use our emotions and desire to be right to cloud our spiritual receptions.

Now to answer your questions. Those who are choosing to use their agency to follow the Prophet and support Prop 8 are nothing like those few Muslim extremist that make up only a small portion of those that follow the Prophet Mahamad. For one thing we have a LIVING prophet. Secondly nowhere in the Koran does it state that they are to kill infindals being American and no one is advocating killing gay people. These are the misguided teachings that the extremists are holding to. Those who vote yes are exercising their democratic freedom to vote on an issue. You have the same right. No one is forcing it on people. If you don't like it or disagree with it vote no on it. Apparently you don't believe this because 8 years ago when the state did vote yes on Prop 22, four judges overturned the peoples vote so now we are voting again on it.

Superstar, I don't know who you are. You don't have a blog, you don't have an identity. You are anonymous. Yet you spout your opinions using the safety of other people blogs carefully hidden. I posted your comment and wrote this blog to show just how low some of those who oppose this will go with the name callings and accusations. This is insulting. Comparing those who are faithful members of the church to those who kill people to follow their beliefs goes beyond the bounds of good taste and into the absurd, irrational and insulting.

In closing it really makes me think twice of anything else you may have to say knowing that you will sink to that level.

"Tolerant" opponents show true colors

2008-10-20T13:09:00.000-07:00

Thousands of traditional marriage supporters have been victimized by the so-called "tolerant" opponents.

Reports are pouring in from across the state of voters' Yes on Proposition 8 signs being vandalized or stolen. Yes on Proposition 8 staff members' homes have also been targeted for vandalism and theft. There have also been reports of volunteers having been physically attacked.

"Destroying and stealing personal property-this is tolerance?" questioned Karen England, with Yes on Proposition 8. "What are opponents so scared of that they are attempting to intimidate and silence us?

"Opponents of Proposition 8 claim that we have nothing to fear about government-mandated same-sex marriage; it won't impact our freedom of speech or religion. How can we believe them when they're stealing our freedom of speech from our own front lawns?

"This is the type of intimidation and true intolerance we can expect without Proposition 8. This should be a wake-up call for every voter concerned about our precious First Amendment freedoms. That's what Yes on Proposition 8 is all about-saving our freedoms."

CA Teachers Union ignites Class war over Prop 8

2008-10-20T12:53:00.000-07:00

In the weeks leading up to Halloween, the California Teacher's Association (CTA) has no intention of masking its agenda on marriage. The 340,000-member organization -- long considered a powerful branch of the radical Left -- took a risky step yesterday by donating a million dollars to defeat Proposition 8. The gift, which is now the largest contribution by any institutional donor to the ballot issue, raises the stakes in an already tense battle for parents' rights.

The CTA's own members, whose dues are fueling this opposition, are fuming. Many, like Randy Peart, (who is LDS) are questioning what same-sex "marriage" has to do with education. "It bothers me [that they're] spend[ing] my money on something I'm morally opposed to," she said. "Why not put that money into classrooms, into making a better place for these kids?" But according to CTA President David Sanchez, "...[I]t's a civil rights issue." And he's right. This is a civil rights issue -- for children who deserve to be raised by a mother and father.

The donation, CTA's second, should serve as a wake-up call for anyone who doesn't believe that schools are becoming dangerous incubators for the homosexual cause. If the union will stoop to using its dues to promote the homosexual agenda, then you can bet it will have no reservations about using its classrooms. Just last week, a San Francisco administrator took first graders on a field trip to their teacher's lesbian "wedding." How's that for indoctrination?

If California schools are promoting "teachable moments" like this for five- and six-year-olds, imagine what the middle and high school curriculum will look like! This is much more than a battle for marriage. It's a last stand for education and parents' rights. The CTA's million dollars will go a long way to undermining the truth. California families need your help! Log on to www.protectmarriage.com and educate yourself about the issues at stake in this fight.

- From Tony Parkins of the Family Research Center

On a personal level my mom is a teacher and so is my bishop and stake president. All three are forced to be members of the CTA. Unless the opt out their dues are used for this. Even if they do opt out, their numbers are counted in the figures that support this. Lets be fair, its one thing to belong to something that fights for something you oppose, when this happens you can walk away. Its another when because of your profession you are forced to join something that stands against what you believe in. How is this freedom?

A Call to Action

2008-10-16T23:04:00.000-07:00

I don't think it can be said any more clear then these two videos.

Here is what the Prophet has asked us to do:

The following letter was sent from the First Presidency of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to Church leaders in California to be read to all congregations on 29 June 2008:

Preserving Traditional Marriage and Strengthening Families

In March 2000 California voters overwhelmingly approved a state law providing that “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.” The California Supreme Court recently reversed this vote of the people. On November 4, 2 008, Californians will vote on a proposed amendment to the California state constitution that will now restore the March 2000 definition of marriage approved by the voters.

The Church’s teachings and position on this moral issue are unequivocal. Marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God, and the formation of families is central to the Creator’s plan for His children. Children are entitled to be born within this bond of marriage.

A broad-based coalition of churches and other organizations placed the proposed amendment on the ballot. The Church will participate with this coalition in seeking its passage. Local Church leaders will provide information about how you may become involved in this important cause.

We ask that you do all you can to support the proposed constitutional amendment by donating of your means and time to assure that marriage in California is legally defined as being between a man and a woman. Our best efforts are required to preserve the sacred institution of marriage.

What really happened in Massachusetts

2008-10-16T01:05:00.000-07:00

A few people have commented about the story mentioned in my previous blog about the parents who objected to what was being taught there kids. Here is their story.
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/oct/08100812.html

Prop. 8 in Plain English

2008-10-16T00:38:00.001-07:00

Lies and scare tactics? I don't think so

2008-10-15T17:20:00.000-07:00

Yesterday's campaign finance report from the No on Proposition 8 campaign is startling.

The California Teacher's Association donated $1 million to the campaign. This is in addition to the hundreds of thousands of dollars already pumped in to the campaign by the CTA in the last few months.

Opponents of Proposition 8 claim that it's all lies when we warn that your children will be indoctrinated about same-sex marriage and homosexuality. They claim that you'll be able to opt your child out of class when same-sex marriage is taught or discussed. But we know that the judiciary is actively promoting the homosexual agenda by their overturning Proposition 22 this year. And case law shows that parents are losing their rights as well.

Last week the US Supreme Court refused to hear the appeal of a father in Massachusetts who tried to opt his kindergarten child out of a classroom discussion about homosexuality. A lower court ruled that parents had no right to be notified when such discussions take place, nor will the children be allowed to opt out of the class.

If this is happening in Massachusetts, where same-sex marriage is legal, it will happen in California.

With the help of the powerful CTA the homosexual agenda will be pushed in every classroom. Parents will be helpless to protect their children-because the government and judiciary have banned them from doing so!

These are not lies, or scare tactics-this is the truth because it's already happening.

Something both candidates can agree on

2008-10-15T01:44:00.000-07:00

Two Apostles Speak about Prop. 8

2008-10-15T00:59:00.000-07:00

Segments from a broadcast to Californian Church members addressing the Church’s doctrine of marriage and the Protect Marriage Coalition.

Alma 30: Yes, even Korihor had a right to preach, BUT ...

2008-10-13T15:06:00.000-07:00

Ironicly several people have tried to use a scripture in Alma to try to prove that the Church is wrong in encourging it's memebers to support Prop 8. Alma:30 (7-11)

7 Now there was no law against man’s belief; for it was strictly contrary to the commands of God that there should be a law which should bring men on to unequal grounds.
8 For thus saith the scripture: Choose ye this day, whom ye will serve.
9 Now if a man desired to serve God, it was his privilege; or rather, if he believed in God it was his privilege to serve him; but if he did not believe in him there was no law to punish him.
10 But if he murdered he was punished unto death; and if he robbed he was also punished; and if he stole he was also punished; and if he committed adultery he was also punished; yea, for all this wickedness they were punished.
11 For there was a law that men should be judged according to their crimes. Nevertheless, there was no law against a man’s belief; therefore, a man was punished only for the crimes which he had done; therefore all men were on equal grounds.

Okay this all sounds good. BUT the thing here is that this scripture is outlying the rights of Korihor (an anti-christ)who was preaching that there was no God and that people who followed commandments were foolish.

"18 And thus he did preach unto them, leading away the hearts of many, causing them to lift up their heads in their wickedness, yea, leading away many women, and also men, to commit whoredoms—telling them that when a man was dead, that was the end thereof."

What this scripture says is that, yes, Korihor had every right in the world to preach what he wanted to and believe what he wanted to even if it was wrong. But that didn't mean that if man followed him that while they may not be judged on Earth for their actions, they still faced the wrath of God. Look at what happened to him.

What more if you follow this scripture to the conclusion you find that the church was doing exactly what the church is doing today in preaching against such spiritual deadly doctrine. The fate of Korihor for example is enough evidence of why we shouldn't question God.

I really don't think that anyone who has a testimony in the restored gospel would want to use this an example for justifying anything they do judging from what happened next.

Interestingly enough there was a law and punishment for adultery. I doubt you want to get into a discussion over that.

I would challenge anyone to read the rest of the chapter to see what happens next. Those who oppose Prop 8 are good at accusing the church of using half truths and such to scare you into voting. I think its ironic that they would use this scripture, taken out of contaxt, about a man who is doing exactly the same thing as a lot of those who would have us go against the council of the living prophets is doing today. And of course I'm sure once they read this they will then start to complain that I'm intolarant. Its the same one note tune.

What it comes down to is pretty simple. Let's put ourselves in the feet of those who were asked to board the ark. To follow Moses into the wilderness, to follow Lehi and his family, to leave Sodom and Gomorrah. All those people had a choice to follow the Prophet or not. Those who did, while it may have been rough were blessed. Those who didn't had no promise of blessings or protection and eventually paid for their disobedience. This is the same today. I don't know how to be anymore clear other then to say that the Prophet of God has asked us to act. It's now up to us to gather the strength to follow.

Legal background on Prop 8 and consequences

2008-10-13T14:52:00.000-07:00

I have attached three things to this post. The first is a memo in response to several documents circulating that claim to argue against information sent to LDS Church leaders about the Consequences if Prop 8 fails. The second is the actual response with links and supplemental research material on the topic, the third is a copy of the actual "Six Consequences" memo. I hope this info is helpful. All three are from the source and aren't from second hand sources. There is also a wealth of info at the newsroom at LDS.org and www.protectmarriage.com.

As a side, don't go to yeson8.com seeking info in favor of the measure, its been purchased by the NO group and is used to direct traffic there way. This is a really honest move. In addition we just received word that a group has been organized to remove signs from peoples yards. There is a website were you are supposed to turn in your Mormon Friends as being LDS is their name is listed as a contributor. Talk about and exercise in tolerance.

______________________________

By now probably most of you seen a document circulating that attempts to refute the Six Consequences piece we are using to describe what could happen should Prop 8 fail. This anti Prop 8 document comes in different forms and supposedly from different sources. One apparent source is from LDS members who are opposed to Prop 8 because they believe the LDS Church is wrong. Another apparent source is from LDS members who claim to be in favor of Prop 8 but “believe” the Six Consequences are erroneous and not well grounded in the law.

Whatever the source the purpose is the same---to undercut YES on Prop 8 arguments and specifically the Six Consequences.

The Six Consequences literature we have been circulating has its origin and roots in the document found on the official LDS website. This document is entitled “The Divine Institution of Marriage.” What the opposition has been circulating attempts to undercut the legal concerns the Church expresses. Lest there be any misunderstanding, the Church’s legal concerns ( Six Consequences literature) have been vetted at the highest level and have taken into consideration the best legal advice possible.

The piece I have attached above, authored by William C. Duncan, spells out the legal opinions and precedents that undergird the Six Consequences literature. As you see fit please feel free to circulate the Duncan document.
_____________________

Most people are rightfully leery of buying something just because the seller touts his or her personal religious activity. In California, right now, there are groups working to defeat Proposition 8, the proposed constitutional amendment that would protect the institution of marriage as the union of a man and a woman. Part of their sales pitch is their religious identity.

They feel the need to advertise this because their own church, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, has officially announced its support for the common-sense measure that would reverse the actions of a bare majority of the California Supreme Court that ruled in May that a hitherto unknown and still unwritten provision of that state’s constitution required that marriage be redefined to include same-sex couples.

Most recently, an attorney and a group calling itself “Mormons for Marriage” have been attacking the idea that redefining marriage in California creates possible negative ramifications for religious liberty in this state. They have attempted to refute an anonymous document that lists some of these potential ramifications. They say the document misconstrues legal precedents and that, actually, there is no reason to worry that churches and religious believers will be harmed in any way if California redefines marriage.

Anyone can read the LDS Church’s official statement on the issue, “The Divine Institution of Marriage,” published on August 13, 2008 and available on the Church’s website [link: http://newsroom.lds.org/ldsnewsroom/eng/commentary/the-divine-institution-of-marriage] for a careful and persuasive examination of this question that concludes that the redefinition of marriage does bode ill for religious liberty. Interestingly, one of the attacks cites to the Church statement to argue that the debate over marriage should be civil (a point on which all hopefully agree) but does not note this section.

In addition, eminent religious liberty scholars who have a variety of opinions on the subject of same-sex marriage all agree that a conflict between the state and religious organizations and believers is an inevitable result of redefining marriage [link: http://www.amazon.com/Same-Sex-Marriage-Religious-Liberty-Conflicts/dp/074256326]. How that conflict will work out may be a matter of debate but its existence is widely understood to be a given.

The California Supreme Court itself has made it abundantly clear that it does not think the Federal or State Constitutions provide a religious exemption to laws mandating identical treatment of same-sex couples or gay and lesbian individuals. In a recent, unanimous, opinion to this effect, the court said a doctor could not invoke his religious beliefs in a lawsuit brought against him because he did not provide an artificial insemination procedure to a woman in a same-sex couple. See North Coast Women’s Care Medical Group v. San Diego Superior Court, 81 Cal. Rptr. 3d 708 (Cal. 2008). [link: http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/documents/S142892.PDF] In its opinion, the court said that even under the legal standard most protective of religious liberty the doctor would lose because the state had a compelling interest in requiring identical treatment of homosexuals. One judge wrote a separate opinion agreeing with the result and identifying the court’s
same-sex marriage decision as the authority for the proposition that every law must treat same-sex and opposite-sex couples exactly the same. Ibid. at 722 (opinion of Justice Baxter).

Since many churches’ religious beliefs do not allow them to provide employment, public accommodations, adoption services and other benefits to same-sex couples, it is not very hard to see that the court’s ruling sets up a serious quandary for believers.

Those who are now arguing that “all is well” for religious liberty say that it is not the redefinition of marriage that has caused these changes. In one way they are right, but their argument is also very misleading. It is true that states which have not redefined marriage have significantly interfered with religious liberty in advancing the cause of gay rights. They have relied on state statutes enacted by legislatures. These statutes, though, could be amended to make exceptions for religious groups. When the court redefines marriage, however, it makes the issue a constitutional matter and the court interpretation will trump any statutory exemption and might, as the California Supreme Court ruled, even outweigh other constitutional rights like religious freedom.

This is what the U.S. Supreme Court held in a famous case brought to remove the tax exemption of a religious college, Bob Jones University, which at the time forbade interracial dating. The government argued successfully in that case that the university should have its tax exemption revoked because the government’s policy of ending racial discrimination outweighed any other consideration. See Bob Jones University v. U.S., 461 U.S. 574 (1983) [link: http://supreme.justia.com/us/461/574/case.html]

It is common sense to most of us that racial discrimination is wrong and that a belief in marriage as the union of a man and a woman is a different matter. When the California Supreme Court ruled that marriage had to be redefined, however, they turned the issue of marriage into a civil rights issue and gave official government endorsement to the idea that those who believe in husband/wife marriage are bigots. The Bob Jones case and many other laws teach us that the law does not tolerate those it considers to be bigots.

Proposition 8 would overrule the California Supreme Court’s holding about marriage and allow those who believe in marriage to continue that belief without the official stigma of being considered bigots.

The marriage decision will have effects beyond religious liberty. One of the most obvious is that it requires schools to teach students of every age that there is no difference between marriage between a husband and wife and between same-sex couples. California law now requires that students in public schools from kindergarten on must be taught about “Family health and child development, including the legal and financial aspects and responsibilities of marriage and parenthood.” California Education Code 51890 [link: http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=edc&group=51001-52000&file=51890-51891] Now that marriage has been officially redefined, any discussion of marriage must include discussions of same-sex marriage. Another provision of the law forbids discrimination in any school program on the basis of “sexual orientation” which reinforces this policy. California Education Code 200 [link:
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cacodes/edc/200-201.html]

This is not a hypothetical concern. In Massachusetts, the only other state to redefine marriage, this exact situation has arisen. Parents who objected to pro-gay curriculum at their children’s elementary school lost their lawsuit seeking an injunction to exempt their children from the material, in part because a federal court said the public schools “have an interest in promoting tolerance, including for the children (and parents) of gay marriages.” See Parker v. Hurley, 514 F.3d 87 (1st Cir. 2008). [link: http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/07-1528-01A.pdf]

There are other religious liberty concerns as well. In Canada, where marriage has been redefined, a Knights of Columbus hall in British Columbia was fined for canceling a reception for a same-sex couple’s wedding. See Chymyshyn v. Knights of Columbus, 2005 BCHRT 544 (2005). [link: http://www.bchrt.bc.ca/decisions/2005/pdf /Smith_and_Chymyshyn_v_Knights_of_Columbus_and_others_2005_BCHRT_544.pdf] The list could go on.

These concerns do not exhaust the potential harms to which Proposition 8 would respond.

When the California Supreme Court redefined marriage, they did so not only for the small group who might benefit from the change but for every citizen of the State of California. This change means that the law of California now strongly endorses three ideas: men and women are essentially interchangeable, children do not need a mother and father and those who disagree are bigots.

In reality, every healthy human society, across time and cultures, has had some kind of marriage institution to encourage those who might create children to take responsibility for those children and for each other. Marriage is fundamentally about children’s needs, not adult desires.

Our society owes children the opportunity, whenever possible, to know and develop a meaningful bond with their own mother and father. Marriage between a man and a woman is the best way to provide this opportunity.

California law now creates intentionally motherless or fatherless families where children will not experience the unique contributions of at least one of their parents.

Decades of social science research has effectively demonstrated that the best arrangement for children’s well being is to be raised by their own mother and father who are married to each other. Even married couples that do not have children promote society’s concern for children by providing an example to those that do and, by observing their marriage vows, preventing the creation of other motherless or fatherless homes.

Proposition 8 is not about taking people’s rights away. It is a simple way to protect marriage. It is also the last chance California voters may have to get their say on this matter.

William Duncan is the director of the Marriage Law Foundation. The views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the official position of the Protect Marriage campaign in California or of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
__________________

Six Consequences the Coalition Has Identified If Proposition 8 Fails

1. Children in public schools will have to be taught that same-sex marriage is just as good as traditional marriage. The California Education Code already requires that health education classes instruct children about marriage. (§51890)

Therefore, unless Proposition 8 passes, children will be taught that marriage is between any two adults regardless of gender. There will be serious clashes between the secular school system and the right of parents to teach their children their own values and beliefs.

2. Churches may be sued over their tax exempt status if they refuse to allow same-sex marriage ceremonies in their religious buildings open to the public. Ask whether your pastor, priest, minister, bishop, or rabbi is ready to perform such marriages in your chapels and sanctuaries.

3. Religious adoption agencies will be challenged by government agencies to give up their long-held right to place children only in homes with both a mother and a father. Catholic Charities in Boston already closed its doors in Massachusetts because courts legalized same-sex marriage there.

4. Religions that sponsor private schools with married student housing may be required to provide housing for same-sex couples, even if counter to church doctrine, or risk lawsuits over tax exemptions and related benefits.

5. Ministers who preach against same-sex marriages may be sued for hate speech and risk government fines. It already happened in Canada, a country that legalized gay marriage. A recent California court held that municipal employees may not say: “traditional marriage,” or “family values” because, after the same-sex marriage case, it is “hate speech.”

6. It will cost you money. This change in the definition of marriage will bring a cascade of lawsuits, including some already lost (e.g., photographers cannot now refuse to photograph gay marriages, doctors cannot now refuse to perform artificial insemination of gays even given other willing doctors). Even if courts eventually find in favor of a defender of traditional marriage (highly improbable given today’s activist judges), think of the money – your money – that will be spent on such legal battles.

My blog, my beliefs, tolerance and Prop 8

2008-10-13T12:02:00.000-07:00

I wanted to address some of the comments left recently on my blog concerning my support of Prop 8.

I am a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I am a served a faithful mission for the church and I hold an temple reccomened. I know that Jesus Chirst is the Son of God and the Savor of the world. I know it is only through his atonement and his plan for us that we can return and inhariet all our Heavanly Father has to give us. I know that this is the only true church and that it is led by a living prophet. I know that Pres. Thomas S. Monson is that prophet. I know that Joseph Smith restored this church and brought fourth the Book of Mormon - Another Testiment of Jesus Christ.

As far as Prop 8 is concerned, "The Family: A Proclamation to the World" provides enough of an argument, at least for those who consider themselves faithful members of the Church as to why Prop 8 needs to be passed. If that isn't enough I think the letter from the First Presidency urging us to put our best efforts into does that.

We don't have a Prophet just to follow when we agree with him. Our opinion doesn't make something right or wrong in the eyes of God. That's God's call. It's how we use our agency to be obedient to those things He has asked us to do that does.

The Proclamation wasn't given just to us as members of the church, but to the world. They were warning the world as to what will happen if these things continue.

These men are prophets, seers, and revelators. I raised my hand to the square a few weeks ago at General Conference to sustain them. Okay so I'm sure lots of people will say I'm following them blindly, because they disagree with them. But I've prayed about this, believe me, I struggle with SGA also.

When the Prophet speaks as the Prophet, and the Prophet asks us to do something, that should be a pretty good reason.

As for the hope of new revelation or whatever, I think the key here is that we need to consider that in order for any new revelation to be given, we have to be willing to accept and live the revelation we do have. We can't just sit around and ignore it until we get something better. We need to prove ourselves worthy by obeying what we have been told.

The bottom line here is simple. A. Acting on homosexual urges is a sin. B. In regards to Prop. 8, the Prophet has ask us to support it, not the republicans or the democrats - the Prophet. If you sustained him as such in General Conference, if you hold a temple recommend and said you sustain him as the Prophet, and if you say you have a testimony of the restored Church as led by the Prophet then what more proof do you need?

As for my blog, this is my blog. I will consider your opinions, I will even post them. But please remember that these are my opinions and beliefs, please at least respect that even if you do disagree with me. Please have at least some of the tolerance that you seem to think I lack.

An Apostle Speaks about Prop. 8

2008-10-11T08:47:00.000-07:00

In this clip Elder David A. Bednar of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints answers questions posed to him from a group of young adults.

Elder Bednar talks about "the tyranny of tolerance," this is an all to true occurrence and one only needs to read the blogs of those who oppose Prop 8 to see it in work.

The most frighting thing about the whole issue is what can happen to the rights of those who do stand against same gender marriage if Prop 8 fails. I guess separation of Church and State isn't an issue as long as the state is on you're side telling the church's what they can and can't teach and what they can and can't believe.

Why I support Proposition 8

2008-10-09T14:14:00.000-07:00

From The Family: A Proclamation to the World

“We, the First Presidency and the Council of the Twelve Apostles of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, solemnly proclaim that marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God and that the family is central to the Creator’s plan for the eternal destiny of His children.

“All human beings—male and female—are created in the image of God. Each is a beloved spirit son or daughter of heavenly parents, and, as such, each has a divine nature and destiny. Gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose."

“We warn that individuals who violate covenants of chastity, who abuse spouse or offspring, or who fail to fulfill family responsibilities will one day stand accountable before God. Further, we warn that the disintegration of the family will bring upon individuals, communities, and nations the calamities foretold by ancient and modern prophets.

“We call upon responsible citizens and officers of government everywhere to promote those measures designed to maintain and strengthen the family as the fundamental unit of society” (Ensign, Nov. 1995, 102).

The following letter was sent from the First Presidency of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to Church leaders in California to be read to all congregations on 29 June 2008:

Preserving Traditional Marriage and Strengthening Families

"In March 2000 California voters overwhelmingly approved a state law providing that “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.” The California Supreme Court recently reversed this vote of the people. On November 4, 2 008, Californians will vote on a proposed amendment to the California state constitution that will now restore the March 2000 definition of marriage approved by the voters."

The Church’s teachings and position on this moral issue are unequivocal. Marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God, and the formation of families is central to the Creator’s plan for His children. Children are entitled to be born within this bond of marriage.

A broad-based coalition of churches and other organizations placed the proposed amendment on the ballot. The Church will participate with this coalition in seeking its passage. Local Church leaders will provide information about how you may become involved in this important cause.

We ask that you do all you can to support the proposed constitutional amendment by donating of your means and time to assure that marriage in California is legally defined as being between a man and a woman. Our best efforts are required to preserve the sacred institution of marriage.

From www.preservingmarriage.org

* Having tolerance without condoning — We can love someone while still maintaining and advocating our standards and beliefs.

* Unless Proposition 8 passes, California society will soon undergo a profound change in its basic understanding of marriage and family life. — That will affect everyone in numerous ways. Over time, greater acceptance of nontraditional marriage will be demanded of all people. This could impact the ability of any religion to teach and practice its beliefs.

* Proposition 8 will not hurt gays — In California, the law provides for marriage-related benefits to be given to civil unions and domestic partnerships. Proposition 8 does not diminish these benefits.

* Failure to pass Proposition 8 will hurt children — If gay marriage remains legal, public schools will put it on equal footing with traditional marriage. Children will likely receive “age appropriate” information about sexual relations within heterosexual and homosexual marriages.

* Failure to pass Proposition 8 will hurt churches — The court’s decision will inevitably lead to conflicts with religious liberty and free speech rights. Society will become more and more hostile to traditional beliefs about marriage and family.

The bottom line is this:

The focus of the Church’s involvement is specifically same-sex marriage and its consequences. The Church does not object to rights (already established in California) regarding hospitalization and medical care, fair housing and employment rights, or probate rights, so long as these do not infringe on the integrity of the family or the constitutional rights of churches and their adherents to administer and practice their religion free from government interference.

— The Divine Institution of Marriage

General Conference Reflections

2008-10-06T17:43:00.000-07:00

I have found that you get what you put into conference. Sometimes the lessons aren't things we need right then and we don't hear them. There are times when I may be feeling down and remember something I heard and then think, wow, that's what he must have meant. Sometimes I feel like a talk was written just for me. Sometimes maybe years from now I will need to hear what was said. Sometimes its the guy next to me that needed that message, who knows maybe he is struggling with something I don't know about and the talk will help him out.

When I feel like, "this is good but its not for me," are the times that I've chosen to put myself out of the spire of influence of the spirit so to speak. If that makes since. For instance, when I first heard Elder Bednar talk about how "we should" pray, I got a bit resentful and thought "how dare he tell me how to talk to my Father in Heaven, what right does he have?" Then I realized that I was letting pride take control and I tried it Saturday night. Wow. What an amazing experience. You know the more I prayed about the things I felt blessed with, the more I realized how many answers we did have and I also realized that sometimes the reason I felt so alone and lost was because I was the one who didn't want to accept them. It reminded me of what one of the Seventy said, "We can choose to walk with God or walk in some other direction."

The concept that "we don't know all, but we know enough" really touched me. I don't know all the answers but I do know enough. And the concept of "come what may" was one that I really do need to apply in my life. I may not know why things happen the way they do, but I can choose to act or react. Learn some valuable lessons or feel bad for myself and be the victim.

I've always loved General Conference. I like to attend it live, but sometimes I will be the first to admit that while I get a boost out of being around so many people who believe the way I do, and the Mormon Tabernacle Choir is good for an energy boost of the spirit, sometimes I wonder if I get all I should out of it. Because this time I wasn't in Utah and watched it at home, I decided to try an experiment. I prayed about it and asked the Lord to help me find one thing in each talk that I could use. I also made a point of staying off the internet and such so I could concentrate on Conference and not just have it on while I'm doing stuff. This was hard LOL! I do think I got more out of it this time 800 miles away then I did last April being in the Conference Center.

We are so blessed. We have so many answers that the world is struggling to find. When it comes to the topic of homosexuality we have the understanding of why acting on it is really a sin. For us its not a matter of "because it's sick or perverted" we understand how it will frustrate the Lords plan of salvation for us. How it would prevent us from gaining exhalation. Elder Nelson touched on this so beautifully. It is simple. We understand why marrige is central to the Fathers plan and why same gender marrige is so detrimental to it. These things are all very clear, and what is even more clear is how Satan will use everything in his power to get us to forget these truths, to feel sorry for ourselves, to lament what we are being ask to sacrifice and to feel like we are giving up part of who we are in order to be faithful.

I honestly feel that when we are converted to the gospel of Jesus Christ, that His way will outshine any other way. But I also know that if we dwell on what we wish could be, it is very easy for us to see other paths and then to further confuse the situation by convincing ourselves that while the gospel is a good path, it isn't for us. We do this because lets face it, we are good people and we want to be happy and we aren't specifically doing this to mock God, we are just acting on what feels right. The problem is that when it starts to feel right is about the time we have lost the spirit that tells us its not right.

I know some of this is hard to hear, believe me its hard to accept on a personal level. But its true. Before the answers we get will help us out, we need to be willing to accept them, even if we don't like them.

Prop 8: The Personal Stuff

2008-09-28T00:30:00.000-07:00

I posted some info, now I'm going to post the personal stuff.

I don't think that the Prop 8 items distract from the gospel whatsoever. The gospel is true but it means very little unless its put into action.

The Prophet has asked us to do everything in our power to help with this. So for me this is just me exercising the things that I've been taught within the confides of the gospel. This is about protecting marriage and about protecting families. I've prayed about this, and I feel that its what the Lord has asked me to do through his prophet. It is supported by the Family Proclamation and everything that we hold sacred about families.

This isn't an attack on me or anyone who struggles with same gender attraction who is trying to stay faithful to the gospel. This is about a few people trying to redefine what is basic in society.

As for people saying ignorant things, do you mean people who are legitimately misinformed or people who disagree with me? Sometimes I find that term ignorant to be used more in the latter sense.

To be honest I have found that it has provided us with an opportunity to really educate those in the church about why we believe its a sin and dispels some silly and really ignorant ideas. Its helped members know that it is possible to struggle with same gender attraction and be a faithful, temple recommended holding Latter-day Saint, its made people stop and rethink why they think the way they have, and its provided a way for Latter-day Saints to get involved with other like minded Christians to help do the same about our various faiths.

Prop 8 and Background on the 8 Consequenses

2008-09-27T23:39:00.000-07:00

I have attached three things to this post. The first is a memo in response to several documents circulating that claim to argue against information sent to LDS Church leaders about the Consequences if Prop 8 fails. The second is the actual response with links and suplimental research material on the topic, the third is a copy of the actual "Six Consequences" memo. I hope this info is helpful. All three are from the source and aren't from second hand sources. There is also a wealth of info at the newsroom at LDS.org and protectmarriage.com.

As a side, don't go to yeson8.com seeking info in favor of the measure, its been purchased by the NO group and is used to direct traffic there way.
______________________________

By now probably most of you seen a document circulating that attempts to refute the Six Consequences piece we are using to describe what could happen should Prop 8 fail. This anti Prop 8 document comes in different forms and supposedly from different sources. One apparent source is from LDS members who are opposed to Prop 8 because they believe the LDS Church is wrong. Another apparent source is from LDS members who claim to be in favor of Prop 8 but “believe” the Six Consequences are erroneous and not well grounded in the law.

Whatever the source the purpose is the same---to undercut YES on Prop 8 arguments and specifically the Six Consequences.

The Six Consequences literature we have been circulating has its origin and roots in the document found on the official LDS website. This document is entitled “The Divine Institution of Marriage.” What the opposition has been circulating attempts to undercut the legal concerns the Church expresses. Lest there be any misunderstanding, the Church’s legal concerns ( Six Consequences literature) have been vetted at the highest level and have taken into consideration the best legal advice possible.

The piece I have attached above, authored by William C. Duncan, spells out the legal opinions and precedents that undergird the Six Consequences literature. As you see fit please feel free to circulate the Duncan document.
_____________________

Most people are rightfully leery of buying something just because the seller touts his or her personal religious activity. In California, right now, there are groups working to defeat Proposition 8, the proposed constitutional amendment that would protect the institution of marriage as the union of a man and a woman. Part of their sales pitch is their religious identity.

They feel the need to advertise this because their own church, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, has officially announced its support for the common-sense measure that would reverse the actions of a bare majority of the California Supreme Court that ruled in May that a hitherto unknown and still unwritten provision of that state’s constitution required that marriage be redefined to include same-sex couples.

Most recently, an attorney and a group calling itself “Mormons for Marriage” have been attacking the idea that redefining marriage in California creates possible negative ramifications for religious liberty in this state. They have attempted to refute an anonymous document that lists some of these potential ramifications. They say the document misconstrues legal precedents and that, actually, there is no reason to worry that churches and religious believers will be harmed in any way if California redefines marriage.

Anyone can read the LDS Church’s official statement on the issue, “The Divine Institution of Marriage,” published on August 13, 2008 and available on the Church’s website http://newsroom.lds.org/ldsnewsroom/eng/commentary/the-divine-institution-of-marriage for a careful and persuasive examination of this question that concludes that the redefinition of marriage does bode ill for religious liberty. Interestingly, one of the attacks cites to the Church statement to argue that the debate over marriage should be civil (a point on which all hopefully agree) but does not note this section.

In addition, eminent religious liberty scholars who have a variety of opinions on the subject of same-sex marriage all agree that a conflict between the state and religious organizations and believers is an inevitable result of redefining marriage www.amazon.com/Same-Sex-Marriage-Religious-Liberty-Conflicts/dp/074256326 understood to be a given.

The California Supreme Court itself has made it abundantly clear that it does not think the Federal or State Constitutions provide a religious exemption to laws mandating identical treatment of same-sex couples or gay and lesbian individuals. In a recent, unanimous, opinion to this effect, the court said a doctor could not invoke his religious beliefs in a lawsuit brought against him because he did not provide an artificial insemination procedure to a woman in a same-sex couple. See North Coast Women’s Care Medical Group v. San Diego Superior Court, 81 Cal. Rptr. 3d 708 (Cal. 2008). www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/documents/S142892.PDF In its opinion, the court said that even under the legal standard most protective of religious liberty the doctor would lose because the state had a compelling interest in requiring identical treatment of homosexuals. One judge wrote a separate opinion agreeing with the result and identifying the court’s
same-sex marriage decision as the authority for the proposition that every law must treat same-sex and opposite-sex couples exactly the same. Ibid. at 722 (opinion of Justice Baxter).

Since many churches’ religious beliefs do not allow them to provide employment, public accommodations, adoption services and other benefits to same-sex couples, it is not very hard to see that the court’s ruling sets up a serious quandary for believers.

Those who are now arguing that “all is well” for religious liberty say that it is not the redefinition of marriage that has caused these changes. In one way they are right, but their argument is also very misleading. It is true that states which have not redefined marriage have significantly interfered with religious liberty in advancing the cause of gay rights. They have relied on state statutes enacted by legislatures. These statutes, though, could be amended to make exceptions for religious groups. When the court redefines marriage, however, it makes the issue a constitutional matter and the court interpretation will trump any statutory exemption and might, as the California Supreme Court ruled, even outweigh other constitutional rights like religious freedom.

This is what the U.S. Supreme Court held in a famous case brought to remove the tax exemption of a religious college, Bob Jones University, which at the time forbade interracial dating. The government argued successfully in that case that the university should have its tax exemption revoked because the government’s policy of ending racial discrimination outweighed any other consideration. See Bob Jones University v. U.S., 461 U.S. 574 (1983) supreme.justia.com/us/461/574/case.html

It is common sense to most of us that racial discrimination is wrong and that a belief in marriage as the union of a man and a woman is a different matter. When the California Supreme Court ruled that marriage had to be redefined, however, they turned the issue of marriage into a civil rights issue and gave official government endorsement to the idea that those who believe in husband/wife marriage are bigots. The Bob Jones case and many other laws teach us that the law does not tolerate those it considers to be bigots.

Proposition 8 would overrule the California Supreme Court’s holding about marriage and allow those who believe in marriage to continue that belief without the official stigma of being considered bigots.

The marriage decision will have effects beyond religious liberty. One of the most obvious is that it requires schools to teach students of every age that there is no difference between marriage between a husband and wife and between same-sex couples. California law now requires that students in public schools from kindergarten on must be taught about “Family health and child development, including the legal and financial aspects and responsibilities of marriage and parenthood.” California Education Code 51890 leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=edc&group=51001-52000&file=51890-51891] Now that marriage has been officially redefined, any discussion of marriage must include discussions of same-sex marriage. Another provision of the law forbids discrimination in any school program on the basis of “sexual orientation” which reinforces this policy. California Education Code 200
caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cacodes/edc/200-201.html

This is not a hypothetical concern. In Massachusetts, the only other state to redefine marriage, this exact situation has arisen. Parents who objected to pro-gay curriculum at their children’s elementary school lost their lawsuit seeking an injunction to exempt their children from the material, in part because a federal court said the public schools “have an interest in promoting tolerance, including for the children (and parents) of gay marriages.” See Parker v. Hurley, 514 F.3d 87 (1st Cir. 2008). ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/07-1528-01A.pdf

There are other religious liberty concerns as well. In Canada, where marriage has been redefined, a Knights of Columbus hall in British Columbia was fined for canceling a reception for a same-sex couple’s wedding. See Chymyshyn v. Knights of Columbus, 2005 BCHRT 544 (2005).bchrt.bc.ca/decisions/2005/pdf/Smith_and_Chymyshyn_v_Knights_of_Columbus_and_others_2005_BCHRT_544.pdf The list could go on.

These concerns do not exhaust the potential harms to which Proposition 8 would respond.

When the California Supreme Court redefined marriage, they did so not only for the small group who might benefit from the change but for every citizen of the State of California. This change means that the law of California now strongly endorses three ideas: men and women are essentially interchangeable, children do not need a mother and father and those who disagree are bigots.

In reality, every healthy human society, across time and cultures, has had some kind of marriage institution to encourage those who might create children to take responsibility for those children and for each other. Marriage is fundamentally about children’s needs, not adult desires.

Our society owes children the opportunity, whenever possible, to know and develop a meaningful bond with their own mother and father. Marriage between a man and a woman is the best way to provide this opportunity.

California law now creates intentionally motherless or fatherless families where children will not experience the unique contributions of at least one of their parents.

Decades of social science research has effectively demonstrated that the best arrangement for children’s well being is to be raised by their own mother and father who are married to each other. Even married couples that do not have children promote society’s concern for children by providing an example to those that do and, by observing their marriage vows, preventing the creation of other motherless or fatherless homes.

Proposition 8 is not about taking people’s rights away. It is a simple way to protect marriage. It is also the last chance California voters may have to get their say on this matter.

William Duncan is the director of the Marriage Law Foundation. The views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the official position of the Protect Marriage campaign in California or of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
__________________

Six Consequences the Coalition Has Identified If Proposition 8 Fails

1. Children in public schools will have to be taught that same-sex marriage is just as good as traditional marriage. The California Education Code already requires that health education classes instruct children about marriage. (§51890)

Therefore, unless Proposition 8 passes, children will be taught that marriage is between any two adults regardless of gender. There will be serious clashes between the secular school system and the right of parents to teach their children their own values and beliefs.

2. Churches may be sued over their tax exempt status if they refuse to allow same-sex marriage ceremonies in their religious buildings open to the public. Ask whether your pastor, priest, minister, bishop, or rabbi is ready to perform such marriages in your chapels and sanctuaries.

3. Religious adoption agencies will be challenged by government agencies to give up their long-held right to place children only in homes with both a mother and a father. Catholic Charities in Boston already closed its doors in Massachusetts because courts legalized same-sex marriage there.

4. Religions that sponsor private schools with married student housing may be required to provide housing for same-sex couples, even if counter to church doctrine, or risk lawsuits over tax exemptions and related benefits.

5. Ministers who preach against same-sex marriages may be sued for hate speech and risk government fines. It already happened in Canada, a country that legalized gay marriage. A recent California court held that municipal employees may not say: “traditional marriage,” or “family values” because, after the same-sex marriage case, it is “hate speech.”

6. It will cost you money. This change in the definition of marriage will bring a cascade of lawsuits, including some already lost (e.g., photographers cannot now refuse to photograph gay marriages, doctors cannot now refuse to perform artificial insemination of gays even given other willing doctors). Even if courts eventually find in favor of a defender of traditional marriage (highly improbable given today’s activist judges), think of the money – your money – that will be spent on such legal battles

How Lucky We Really Are

2008-08-14T14:46:00.001-07:00

There are times when I marvel just how blessed we are to live in a time when we have a living prophet on the face of this Earth. While a majority of the people on this Earth wonder around confused from one worldly concept to the other, we as Latter-day Saints know that we have the gospel of Jesus Christ restored and that the truth is found therein.

I'm saying this to boast. To appear puffed up. To say I am better then anyone else. I do think that knowing this gives us great responsibilities to share it with others and to put it into practice in our own life.

Knowing that the Savior is at the head of the church and that we have a prophet. That the same organization that existed when the Savior was on the Earth now has been restored and the same power of the priesthood is what is directing this work, this is what sustains me and gives me hope when my own imperfections and doubts make me question.

It also tells me who I need to listen to and whose direction I need to follow.

We know through what the Lord has told us the reasons why acting on homosexual urges is wrong. We know its not because the love between two men can't be as real as between a man and women. We know it can be. But we know the real eternal consequences of it also. We know about our Father's plan for us. We know that two men can't be sealed together. Our eternal example is our Heavenly Father AND Mother. It involves children. Of course their are some exceptions to the rules but the Family Proclamation spells it out as clear as it can be possibly spelled out. As Latter-day Saints we know this. We know its NOT a civil rights issue, we know its not to oppress or take away the rights of others. We also realize that people have their agency, that agency isn't free and that there are consequences to makeing choices both right and wrong.

We do understand, especially those of us who struggle. He know how hard it is. We can feel the pain. BUT we have more truth and so we are expected to act on it.

When I read things like "the church has softened up on the gay issue," or "the church has progressed since the 1970's" I wonder what the people mean by that? Are they saying that the Church was wrong back then? If the church "got it wrong" back then are they saying that those who followed the prophet back then were following wrong direction? I wonder what else they think the church was wrong about then and what they think the church is wrong about now?

I think what a lot of people misunderstand is that it is perfectly possible for the revelation and knowledge given at one era, dispensation, generation or so forth to be different then that of today. Each time frame is different. The Lord only reveals what is needed at any given time. The Lord goes by his own time frame and to him it makes perfect sense. To us we don't see the eternal scheme of things and may think that something is lacking or out of touch. That we know better then the Lord or that the Prophet has it wrong.

The Lord for instance didn't immediately tell the world he was going to flood the earth. He told Noah to tell the people to repent, it wasn't until after they refused that he told Noah to build an arc. The Lord doesn't often reveal his reasons for things. He just gives us commandments to follow and if we follow those commandments then we become worthy for additional revelations on a topic if there is more revelation to be given. If not we need to stay worthy to what we have. When we are faithful to the prophet we also know we have the safety of the Lords yoke which he says is lighter then the worlds.

There is a difference between praying to know the truth of something and constantly second guessing those the Lord has set apart and who he uses as his servants to run His church. Following and obeying the Prophet isn't being a blind sheep anymore then those who followed Moses out of Israel or Nephi to the promise land. Of course none of those who followed these prophets had an easy course but they also had the Lord behind them.

Who We Are?

2008-08-14T13:37:00.000-07:00

I have a question for people in this group to ponder.

How do you perceive yourself?

Are you a gay man who have chosen to live according to gospel principles or are you a child of God who struggles with feeling and attractions for members of the same sex?

Do you believe God has created you for a purpose and that our struggles can refine us, that the things we struggle with in this life can teach us and help us grow into the things God wants us to one day be able to inhariet from Him? Or do you believe that God has created us to be how we feel and so these things should define who we are and fighting against them is going against the way God wants us to be? In a sense fighting against our feelings is unnatural?

I think how you answer this question will dictate how you define yourself in a lot of ways spiritually, emotionally and internally.

The brethren have been clear on how we should and shouldn't define ourselves. Do we accept their council as council from God or just council from men who may not understand our struggles but who are trying to? Or do we feel that they don't know enough and no one can really understand our struggles?

Allowing others to have their agency and accepting that not everyone will agree with what we do, do we still accept what the Prophet has said as revealed to him by Heavenly Father. Do we consider acting on homosexual urges sinful or just a personal choice? Do we understand why and how in doing so it would frustrate our eternal progression? Or do we just think its a cruel choice we have to make in order to show God we love him.

Do we believe that it is possible to be tolerant of those who choose to sin, while still believing something is wrong enough to stand against it? Or is standing against sin always going to offend us because we take it personally?

I will admit that when I first heard that the church was going to consent to a meeting with them I too snickered and thought "What on earth is Affirmation hoping to accomplish? These people don't represent me or my point of view?" We all know they aren't looking for dialog, they seek to council the brethren on what they are doing wrong. They hope to lobby for the church to change its beliefs on things that we know through revelation to be wrong and damning.

These people, these "gay Mormons" aren't me any more then Mormon Fundamentalist are in fact Latter-day Saints. I don't think that its judgmental to say that. Part of being a faithful Latter-day Saint is sustaining the Prophet not lobbying against him or his teachings. Yes we need to be loving and tolerant of others but in so doing we don't surrender our beliefs.

I know that when cruel, uniformed things are said in priesthood about gay people, that for the most part, those things aren't about me. I am just as worthy to hold my temple recommend as the next guy. I have chosen not to act on those beliefs. Things like Prop 8 aren't geared against me. Yes we do need to step forward if things are being said out of hatred and ignorance but we also can't confuse someones misinformed attempts at standing for the right to be hateful attacks either. This is where need to step in to foster understanding along with encouraging faithfulness.

I think one of Satan's biggest tools is that after he may fail to bring us down with temptation, he attacks us with being offended. We need to step back and realize that. This isn't about me.

Again I ask you, who are you? Why are you here?

The Things We Say About Other People

2008-08-06T16:18:00.000-07:00

I want to share as an example of how gossip and rumors could have destroyed a friendship. I've held back writing this, sharing it with some friends first to help me say what I want to say in the best way possible. I want to make sure that I begin with the ending. It turned out to be really positive experience in learning just how tolerant and loving a friend can be.

I had a friend who came to visit. He is an RM, he doesn’t struggle with SGA but he’s having some issues of his own. We both noticed on myspace and facebook that we had a mutual friend. This mutual friend does struggle and my friend knows about it. I hadn't really told my friend about my struggle, mainly because it didn't come up and we never really got on that topic. We had other more interesting things to talk about. The mutual friend knew a lot of other guys who do struggle and is also friends with some guys who have given up their struggles and moved on into the gay lifestyle, some of whom don’t like me because of my opinions.

When I saw that my friend and this guy were listed as friends I got a little worried about being "outed." I really didn't think this guy was a mean spirited person, but I also know that he close to people who don’t like me and who I know have gossiped about me to others in the past. I know he doesn't think that highly of me as a result, so you can see why I am concerned.

When my friend got here, I asked him in a roundabout way how he knew this other guy and he said they had grown up together and had been friends. I said cool, I asked him if he had ever talked about me. He said "Um, not really” and changed the subject. Later we got on the topic again when we were online, and he asked me how I knew him, I told him how. And he said, "Well since you brought it up I guess I should tell you the rest. He warned me that you were a gay recruiter and that I should be careful of you."

A couple things really hit me in the gut at this point. A. This guy did out me. B. He also not only outed me, but he did so by saying I could possibly been a threat to a friend.

A lot of things went through my mind. I was mad.

But I was also amazed how nonjudgmental my friend was. I mean a good childhood friend had warned him that not only was I gay but that I recruit others to the lifestyle and yet he didn’t immediately get scared. He planned on staying the weekend anyways. That part really made me realize what a good friend this guy was when he asked me if I did struggle, and I told him yes. He said he understood and that he would like to be a support to me if I ever needed it.

He said that he knew that his friend was only trying to protect him, but that it was wrong for him to be listening to gossip. He said it was apparent that his friend had never taken the time to get to know me as a person or he would know that nothing could be further from the truth. It still stung because I was beginning to wonder who else this guy has talked to about me. But the funny thing was as much as I didn't want to like his friend and as much as I wanted to delete him from my friend list so that he couldn't "expose" me to anyone else, I respected him trying protect his friend, even if it was unfounded. At the same time I realized just how much the things we say can have devastating effects on others efforts to do good if we speak without really knowing the truth.

I guess what really bothered me was the things that had been said about me--that I was a gay recruiter and that I have a major reputation of going after SGA guys trying to befriend them to pull them into the lifestyle. I've never done that. In fact I’ve tried to do the exact opposite. It did also bug me that to say these things about me, he cited people who I know and who have made it pretty public that they are out and no longer living the gospel, and in fact have publicly mocked the church and its teachings, who DO influence others to do immoral things to "be true to themselves." It’s ironic that it’s their words that he believed knowing how they were now living.

My friend who was visiting told me not to worry and that he knew I was a great guy. He said that he still loves his friend but is disappointed in him. He told me to forgive him and be open to being his friend. That is the part that I admired the most that he was able to acknowledge that what his friend did was wrong, but that he was trying to protect him. He did stand up for me and at the same time stay friends with both of us and try to reach out and fix things. Talk about being a peacemaker. That is surely a spiritual gift.

An open letter to anonymous

2008-07-14T12:24:00.000-07:00

I'm setting some blog ground rules. As of now I've been fairly liberal with the posting of anonymous blog comments. But as of now if you can't attach your name to your comment then it won't be posted. I will read them, but I will consider them the same as e-mail. But since I can't privately respond to them I won't. If you want to write me privately great. But unless you post a name to back up your opinion, don't expect me to allow you to use my blog to serve as your platform.

When I blog I attach my name to what I write. In the right hand column is my e-mail address. I own my statements and I stand by them. The problem with anonymous comments is that they aren't owned. If the writer feels so strongly about something to leave a comment then they need to stand by it. If for whatever reason they feel they can't then honestly I don't really want to read them because what its telling me is that they can say anything they want with the safety of hiding behind the shield of being anonymous. Its a lot like punching someone in the back in the dark.

One more point that I feel I need to clear up. I am an active member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. I have a testimony in the Prophet Joseph Smith, in the Book of Mormon and in the continual revelation received and given by our beloved Prophet Thomas S. Monson. I believe that Jesus Christ is my Savior and Redeemer. I also believe that Christ is at the head of this church and that it is led by His prophet. When the Prophet speaks as the Prophet he is saying the things that the Lord has told him to say.

If the Prophet speaks as the Prophet and asks us to do something. It is the same as when Moses or Lehi or Noah was told to tell the people of their dispensation to do something. Yes they had their agency to follow, and those who did were blessed. Its not a matter of being a sheep blindly following. Its a matter of accepting that I have a Sheppard who is also my Savior. I know he has called a Prophet. I found this out for myself by praying for a confirmation and by putting faith in God.

If my blogs sound like someone who is following the Prophet, well its because thats what I'm trying to do. I am standing for something. I won't be anonymous about that.

Choosing to do what's right

2008-07-10T17:03:00.000-07:00

The whole purpose of us being here on the Earth is to test us to see what we will do on our own given the correct principles. Satan's plan would have compelled us to "ACCEPT the right." Agency is a gift that allows us to CHOOSE and show our love to our Heavenly Father in "Choosing the right."

I think you can judge a disciple of Christ by that persons actions when not commanded in all things given a knowledge of right and wrong.

If we accept the that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the restored Church of Christ, led by Christ with a Prophet at the head, then we have to also accept the power and authority that He along with the other prophets and apostles have when speaking "officially" for the Church and therefore the Lord.

Yes, I may not have wanted to flee Babaloyn myself. I may not have wanted to leave Jerusalem, it may have been a fun place to hang out with lots of fun people. I may have not wanted to flee Sodom and Gomorrah, it was probably fun also. I may have been perfectly happy in Egypt. I may have enjoyed myself East and not have wanted to leave the comforts of my home to trek west with the Saints. But in all those cases, following the Prophet, while hard and while I may have not wanted to and even personally disagreeing with the choice to go, following the Prophet was the same as following God. I wonder if I would have been one of those who argued or murmured? Would I have looked back and longed for the things I felt good doing? Would I have resented Moses, or Abraham or Brigham Young?

I also know what the Book of Mormon says about societies that turn their back on God and that turn a blind eye and even accept things that are immoral as natural and even encouraged. These societies eventually went so far as to accept other wicked things such as murder. I wonder if we were to ever vote on the legality of this that if someone would argue that the prohibition against murder comes from the Judeo-Christian law and we should separate church and state. So therefore its not a moral issue it too is a political issue. Sounds ridiculous? One only needs to think about the debate surrounding abortion to see shades of this.

I know that we are ask to be good citizens and help participate in the process of government. This means standing for whats right. I also know that this is a moral issue that has been politicized.

For the most part the Lord doesn't very often "command" us to do anything. When He does we should know He is serious. Yes, we have the Ten Commandments. Yes, because of those who would have us remove them from all public places, we may have to look extra hard to find them, but lets be honest here, We are free to choose to obey them. We aren't free to choose the effects of them or the consequences that follow.

No, the Lord or even the church hasn't "commanded" us to vote or to think a certain way. But we have been taught correct principles, we know the plan. We know what is right and wrong. We know the gospel. We know the end result of what will happen to those who choose not to. If we apply them obedience would be the natural progression, if we honestly have a testimony of the truth of it.

Being faithful to the Lord doesn't make us blind sheep or ignorant. It doesn't make us hateful or bigoted. Yes, when we attach hate and animosity to our actions it does and that isn't being Christlike. Yes, we need to keep it from going that way. We can stand for whats right without hating those who choose what's wrong. But on the other hand those who do fight against the church and its teachings aren't the most tolerant people either when it comes to acceptance of those who disagree with them. Who is normally yielding words "bigot and ignorant" as weapons? We can stand for what's right without being disagreeable. And if we know what the Lord has said is standing for it honestly being ignorant?

I look at it this way. The Prophet has ask us to do something. I know what the Lord has said to be right and wrong. I have faith that if the Prophet in acting as the Prophet AND is directed by the Lord to ask us to do something then its not because he (the Prophet) wants us to do it, its because HE (the Lord), the one who is doing the directing wants us to do it.

I don't know the exact reasons WHY this is such a big deal to them. But it is and that should be a sign no matter how I may personally see it. But like in all other things I have my own agency to choose what I will do and who I will follow and I will be judged accordingly.

The Church takes a stand to protect marriage

2008-06-24T13:31:00.000-07:00

Just got this off the Associated Press news wire this morning.

Mormon Church Enters Calif. Gay Marriage Fight

Tuesday, June 24, 2008 4:30 AM

SALT LAKE CITY -- The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is asking California members to join the effort to amend that state's constitution to define marriage as being between a man and a woman.

A letter sent to Mormon bishops and signed by church president Thomas S. Monson and his two top counselors calls on Mormons to donate "means and time" to the ballot measure. A note on the letter dated June 20 says it should be read during church services on June 29, but the letter was published Saturday on several Web sites.

Church spokesman Scott Trotter said Monday that the letter was authentic. He declined further comment, saying the letter explains the church's reasons for getting involved.

The LDS church will work with a coalition of churches and other conservative groups that put the California Marriage Protection Act on the Nov. 4 ballot to assure its passage, the letter states.

In May, California's Supreme Court overturned a voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage, saying gays could not be denied marriage licenses.

"The church's teachings and position on this moral issue are unequivocal. Marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God and the formation of families is central to the Creator's plan for His children," the four-paragraph letter states.

"We ask that you do all you can to support the proposed constitutional amendment by donating of your means and time to ensure that marriage in California is legally defined as being between a man and a woman," church leaders say in the letter. "Our best efforts are required to preserve the sacred institution of marriage."

California Mormons _ there are more than 750,000, according to a church almanac _ have heard and heeded similar calls from their leaders before.

In 2000, a letter from the pulpit asked members to give time and money in support of Proposition 22, a ballot measure prohibiting California from legally recognizing gay marriages performed outside the state. It passed but was later struck down by the courts.

The LDS church also fought same-sex marriage legislation in other states during the 1990s. As recently as 2006, it signed a letter to Congress seeking an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would define marriage as being between a man and a woman.

The latest letter is a disappointment to members of Affirmation, an international support group for gay, lesbian and transgender Mormons. Last month, Affirmation called on the church not to meddle in California politics.

"This initiative will hurt so many people," executive director W. Olin Thomas said in a statement Monday. "The California law affects civil marriage; it has no effect on any religious institution or official."

Affirmation leaders are scheduled to meet with the head of LDS Family Services, a church social services agency, in August to begin a conversation meant to bridge the divide between Mormonism and gay members hurt by church teachings that homosexuality is a sin.

It will be the first meeting between any arm of the church and Affirmation, which was formed in secret in the 1970s by students at the church-owned Brigham Young University in Provo.

"We're not going to let this stand in the way," Affirmation spokesman David Melson said. "The church has said they are open to finding new avenues and new solutions to minister to gay members, and we are taking them at their word."

I'm Not Ashamed

2008-06-16T19:28:00.000-07:00

There are a few things I will apologize for and a few things that I refuse to. I'm not ashamed of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. I'm not ashamed of its teachings. I'm not ashamed to stand for something even if it makes me politically incorrect or in the minds of pro-gay Mormons - ignorant. If counciled to by the First Presidency I will support any measure that they ask me to. I am not a blind sheep and I don't consider this blind faith. There is no such thing as loyal oppistion in the Kingdom of God. I know that God knows more then I do and if I follow him and his inspired Prophet even if I don't completely understand the reasons I will be safe and blessed. If something attacks things that are sacred to me or that mock God I will stand up against them, I have taken covenants to do so.

I WILL apologize if my approach comes off as unloving, uncaring, unkind or intolerant. I am sorry about that. I struggle with feelings and urges that I used to think made me unworthy. I am attracted to men. I would love to love someone the way that "feels natural." But I know this is wrong. This is why I joined this group. To have support to stay strong. But because this is a support group for people wishing to stay faithful to the gospel of Jesus Christ, I am confused as to how anything I've said may be taken as anything but encouragement to do so.

No I'm not a Prophet, I've never claimed to be. I do know what the Prophet has said about choosing the influences we allow into our lives. I know what the church teaches God says about acting on our urges and I know what I've been taught about things like morality and agency.

I've never said that people who choose to exercise their agency in a way that goes against God's will are bad people. What I have said is that those that do that try to influence others to choose the same path are bad influences. I have said that media that is pro-gay that promotes a gay lifestyle is a bad influence. I have said that anything that helps us justify or normalize what is evil in our minds and that offends the spirit in such away that we lose the influence of the Holy Ghost making us easy targets for the adversary to snare are things that need to be avoided. I honestly don't see how saying this is hateful, contentions or unloving.

I would never purposely stand as a stumbling block to someone trying to be strong. I will always be here for anyone who needs a friend or who needs someone to hold to if they feel weak.

The worst thing in the world is watching a brother make bad choices which you know will lead to his spiritual death when you know that that person knows better. Its hard to stand back because in all honestly there is a point where even the most loving person if they say anything that would question their choice will be taken as closed minded to their happiness. I know this from personal expirence having watched two brothers fall into this path and seeing how those who do love them who are trying to keep them close get accused of this kind of hatred.

What hurts is that I am not a hateful person. I honestly don't want to see the pain that I know is the end result of these choices. I have seen that, experienced that first hand. Maybe I'm not good at tough love but I also know that support can only truly be support if it is used to hold up. Support isn't really support if its just used to stand by. When you are rebuilding, support keeps a structure from falling. But at some point the support system needs to be walled around and needs to be made internal. The outside support system has to be taken down and the structure needs to be able to stand on its own. The structure also needs a strong foundation, but if too much filler is added to the mix when pouring the foundation it can easily become weak and even the best support structure won't hold when the foundation crumbles.

We have our agency and we choose what influences we let into the mix. We also show what we feel is worthy by the things we promote and talk about in a positive way. I know from experiences that when I was feeling weak, I wanted to feel I was a good person so I would search out "support" from people and things that "uplifted" me and told me what I was doing was okay. Because I may have lost the prompting of the Holy Ghost these things seemed to comfort me. But because we never lose the influences of the Spirit even when we do everything we can to not accept it because we don't want to feel guilty something always made me feel as if there was something wrong, something missing. I know its was the Holy Ghost.

Again the purpose of my past few posts wasn't to bring anyone down but to warn about the dangers of allowing these kinds of influences into the mix that we are using to build our spiritual foundations.

Okay now in defense of those who do speak the truth. Some posters have said that if they had read what I wrote while they were at a period in their life when they would have left the group. Now to be honest I wonder if this has more to do with pride and less to do with what I said. When we are lost we don't need road maps that say, this is the way to go if you feel good about it, if not go the other way. Would we want a compass that gave us directions that matched our opinions and feelings? We would like to blame the the feelings we have with what is being said as the result of the spirit of contention. But lets be honest here, if we are trying to justify wrong, that spirit is already present in motivating us, its now just manifesting itself in pride and ego.

...1 Ne. 16: 1-32: And it came to pass that I said unto them that I knew that I had spoken hard things against the wicked, according to the truth; and the righteous have I justified, and testified that they should be lifted up at the last day; wherefore, the guilty taketh the truth to be hard, for it cutteth them to the very center...

Remember brothers, wicked means choosing to sin after you know the truth. It's not sinning in ignorance. Please remember I'm not saying I'm perfect, I need to hear what I'm saying probably more so. I'm only warning because I believe that when we have been warned its our duty if we love each other to warn. And no I'm not accusing anyone here of being wicked, just as I know no one was judging me of needing reproving with sharpness for standing for what I believe to be right.

I love this scripture but I think we also need to be very careful in how we apply it.

D&C 43: Reproving betimes with sharpness, when moved upon by the Holy Ghost; and then showing forth afterwards an increase of love toward him whom thou hast reproved, lest he esteem thee to be his enemy;

We as Latter-day Saints have a tendency to speak in scripts and follow patterns that if we aren't careful can come off as insincere attempts to come off as insincere attempts at being perfect.

Just as we need to have been moved upon by the Holy Ghost to reprove. We also need to really love the person if we are going to try to show an increase in love afterwards. And yes we need to lose the pride, the ego and not let what is truth seem sharp or hard to us if its true. When it comes to the next part of showing love, if you don't really love someone no matter how you say it, if you don't and it will come off as insincere. Perhaps this is also part of why what I write offends people because they can't see into my heart and see that I am speaking with love.

If a person just feels the way they do after being told they are loved in fast in testimony meeting by a total stranger and then later ignored by that person after the meeting when you say hi to them in the meeting house hall way, they aren't really going to feel much of an increase in love. In fact what they may feel is a tinge of resentment and insincerity.

I think we have all been apologized by people in a way that we both knew was more for the sake of the person apologizing to feel better and more "Chirstlike" then for any real feelings of remorse.

If I didn't struggle with this I could see how some could say I don't understand. I do. I know its hard and I know its rough. But I also know what is true. I do understand. Again I offer my most humble apology if the messenger has overshadowed the message but I will stand by the message and I won't apologize for standing for that.

My three days with an apostle

2008-06-08T19:28:00.000-07:00

This has been an amazing three days. Since Friday we have had Elder Richard G. Scott of the Twelve in our stake and for the past three nights I've been able to "sit at his feet" and listen to him in various meetings. He spoke on a wide range of topics from learning to same gender marriage to how we can tell if we are receiving an answer to prayers.

On Friday he spoke to the young adults. We were all gathered in the chapel of the stake center. The high councilman got up to introduce him and Elder Stevenson of the Seventy. He begin to read the bios of the two from these three pages he held up. Elder Scott stood up and went over to the speaker and said, "Brother please, this sounds like a funeral, none of these people care about this stuff, lets just move on, you don't need to read this stuff." There was a lot of laughter and the guy just then said, "well I'm sure you know who he is so umm be nice to him."

After the meeting he met with each and everyone of us to learn our names and shake hands and then eat ice cream with us. This was really a unique opportunity to talk to face-to-face and get to know someone that I've always looked up to.

This was an unusual meeting because he walked around with a mike and encouraged us to ask questions. These are from my notes, they are pretty close to what he said. Again these are my notes and not official transcripts, I don't think I'm sharing anything new but perhaps new ways of thinking about them which is also something he talked about when learning.

This being California of course the topic of Same Gender Marriage came up.
What he said was blunt to the point.

"There are times when we are called on to stand for what is right. There are also times we are called to stand for what is wrong. What I mean by this brothers and sisters is that we must never allow Satan in all his subtle sohpostries to convince us that what is wrong is right."

He talked about how Satan will use things like political correctness to make those who stand for what is right look like hateful people or religious bigots. Or make sin seem like a civil right. Or say that those who stand firm on moral issues are robbing others of their agency.

"When you know the real purpose that you and I are here on the Earth, you will realize this. When you know the plan of our Father you will know why same gender marriages is one of his greatest evils and how it traps those Satan has snared into this lifestyle of the chance of ever having a family that can be eternal. Satan wants to confuse, blur and destroy. This is not a matter of agency once you know the truth, it becomes a matter of obedience."

A friend of mine asked Elder Scott how he could tell the difference between a good feeling and the spirit when he prays for guidance about what to do.

Elder Scott looked at him and asked outright, "are you worthy?" He then added that in most cases when you are living worthily Heavenly Father will not allow bad ideas to pass as spiritual prompting. He said that almost all good ideas will be spiritual. That some times when you have two choices and both are good and it is more of "what you will do with them" and less about "which is the right one."

Another friend of mine asked him "what his favorite dream was." I felt this was an unusual question, but Elder Scott seemed to felt it was a good time to share a spiritual expirence with us. He told of waking up from a dream covered in sweat and sore. He said that he at first felt like he must have had a nightmare. Then he realized that he need to ponder and perhaps see if it was something the Lord was trying to teach him.

In the dream he said he dreamed that he was looking for his late wife but that people kept telling him that she wasn't there. Finally when they realized that he wasn't going to give up they said that she didn't want anything to do with him and further that he would soon lose all memory of her. He said he stopped and said that he had been married in the temple for time and all eternity.

"Suddenly I felt as if I had been raised up out of the scene and I could see that it was evil spirits trying to convince me that that wasn't true."

This is the key point.

He said that we need to be careful not to let Satan or the world or our fears convince us. Not to be taught by our fears or to believe what we have told ourselves in desperation when we are close to losing faith. That a person with a body will always have more power over evil spirits that will try to convince us otherwise. To have faith in God and not our fears or what we convince ourselves is true if it goes against what God has told us.

Elder Scott said was that we should keep a separate journal of things that the Lord teaches us that are sacred to us. He said in the day and age of blogs that some things still need to be kept sacred in a journal. He said he keeps his on a computer with a password.

He told us that there are times we may not get anything out of a meeting but that we should still take notes. He said that sometimes in the future when we are pondering things that these items may be of some importance in the future. We may not be in the proper mind frame or maybe the Lord knows we will one day need the message.

He also said that sometimes things are too sacred at the time to share with others but that sometimes we will be inspired to share them at the right time. He talked about his recent conference talk when he was supposed to right about justice and mercy and while he tried and prayed and wrote nothing came to mind, but he was inspired to write about abuse. He said that after he had completed the talk he said "Well I guess perhaps the Lord wants me to talk about abuse."

A final thought he left with us was the difference between leaning by hearing and learning by understanding. He said in teaching if we "communicate" with those we teach instead of just trying to impart our message, which isn't bad but not the best way to teach, we open up the channels for the spirit to teach and edify. The best teachers are those who help the invite the Spirit to teach with them as their companions.

He challenged us to always set goals by saying for instance instead of "I will grow more spiritual." To say "I will grow more spiritual BY:" Then add bullet points.

I hope that I've been able to impart some of what I've learned and more importantly the spirit I've felt the past three days. If anyone wants to comment or write me with their thoughts I'd love to discuss them. Thank you for the opportunity to share them with you.

Some thoughts on suicide

2008-05-29T09:02:00.000-07:00

This is something I wrote in response to a post about a young man who took his life who struggled with SGA.

It is tragic. And a topic that needs to be dwelt with with love and compassion.

Suicide is never the answer. I think anyone who has a basic grasp on the gospel and the atonement knows that. I think when someone gets to that state where they believe that it's the answer there are other issues that needed to be dealt with.

Elder Ballard writes about speaking at the funeral of a friend who took his life: "Peace came to me only when I recognized that only the Lord could administer fair judgment. He alone had all the facts, and only He would know the intent of the heart of my friend." http://www.providentliving.org/ses/media/articles/0,11275,2875-1---71,00.html

I believe that now the young man is in God's arms. But I don't believe he is at peace any more than anyone who has died without accepting the gospel. He still needs to make a choice. People don't just die and automatically become saved. We do baptisms for the dead yes, but they have to accept it. However that is now between him and God, as it was here.

We are now left with those who he has left behind and they are the ones who we need to be concerned with, to love, to uphold and to support. We can continue to pray for our friend. But we also have to realize that agency is a personal thing and that all we can do is love. This is a really hard thing to cope with. It is my personal belief that while we may take with us our desires, lusts and addictions so to speak. We don't take our bodies with us so we are free of any emotional, physical or psychological issues that may cloud our judgments. That last part is just my own opinion.

Taking ones life is never the answer. The sad fact is that death doesn't change what is right or wrong, true or false.

A discussion of what is worse Spiritual death vs. temporal death should never end with the misguided notion that suicide is better then a life of sin and disobedience to the Lord and his commandments. We didn't create our lives and we don't have the right to decide when they end. We don't choose our trials and we can only choose to act or react on them.

But I also think we have to look at this from the eternal perspective and realize that we lived before we were born and when we die its only part of the plan. We will live again. In essence we never stop living. Death is progressive. While I will miss my friend for the rest of my mortal sojourn, I know he has moved on and will be there when its my turn.

What we do in this life does have everything to do with how we spend eternity. I also know that the trials and addictions we have in this life we take with us into the next and it is only through obedience to the commandments that we overcome them. Part of that is wanting to overcome them and having the desire to work on overcoming them.

Now would I rather a friend kill himself or live a gay lifestyle? Well I would never want him to take his life. But I would also feel that his choice to live the lifestyle is in essence spiritual suicide. The third option is of course I'd rather him submit to the Lord and live the gospel. But thats his agency and he has to choose. I have to love him no matter what his choices are. If he did kill himself I would feel bad that he didn't feel the love of the gospel that could save him and comfort him. But I also know that this struggle is a hard one. I would be happy that he was in the arms of his Savior so to speak. But I would also know that he would still be accountable for making a choice in the sprint World in if he would live to follow God.

Killing yourself isn't the easy way out. I think thats probably the cruelest reality.

Gay Marriage in CA - Thing heat up fast

2008-05-16T08:48:00.000-07:00

It will be an interesting next couple months. I predict a few things will come of this. Some very positive and yes some very negative.

I don't know yet how the Church will respond, but I do recall one positive of Prop 22. For years Latter-day Saints, Catholics, Evangelical Christians, Baptists etc were all divided among denominational lines. For the first time that I could recall these churches stood together for one moral cause. They were working together and not just spending time telling the other that they aren't Christian. Later this helped foster members of the these church working together informally on other community issues. Ministers met with bishops, joint service projects were planned and activities held.

In northern California, the part above Sacramento, this feeling of unity has continued. In fact while in the rest of the country when Mitt Romney was running for president and everyone was saying how it will be the evangelicals in the south that bring him down, a lot of his volunteers in NorCal, were evangelical Christians. One of them who was head of the NorCal campaign was someone I had worked with during Prop 22 who was a member of the largest Evangelical Christian Church in the area. We had met during Prop 22 and have worked on common causes in the political realm ever since. He serves as chief of staff to our assemblyman and has told me on numerous occasions that Mormons make the best volunteers.

Of course on the negative side, those inside the church who would argue that we not get involved would argue that the church shouldn't get involved in political issues, forgetting that this is a moral issue and we have a mandate not only scriptural but also from our prophet to fight for moral causes. Outside the church I'm sure that if the church gets involved again we will be painted anti-gay and homophobic. The church will again be blamed for unhappiness and hatred. No one will take the time to try to understand why the church stands for protecting families and such and we will be lumped together with groups that advocate things that are unchristlike and hateful.

This is a very poloraizing issue. One that does make those who struggle uncomfortable. Its one that does tend to draw people off the fences and pull them to one side or the other. I think that in someways its time for those of us who struggle but who have chosen to follow the path that God has set for us to stand up and show that the sin is in acting on the urges and not just having them. That you can have feelings of SGA and be faithful. In someways this could be a chance for fostering understanding. But we may need to take the lead.

I only hope that those on both sides, who are fighting for what they believe in their heart to be right will remember Pres Hinckley's statement that we can disagree without being disagreeable. I also hope that those within the church will remember that the Prophet wouldn't ask us to do something as the Prophet if it didn't come from God and he is only asking us, he isn't commanding us. We were never commanded to vote a certain way, we were asked, we were urged. Our agency was never taken from us.

Honestly if I could choose, I would like to see people be able to be happy. I don't think we should take away peoples agency and I don't know if doing things that prevent people from living in a way that is socially moral is helping. Do I think a majority of gay couples who want to marry are bad people. No I don't. This is a hard one because I do have friends who fit into this category, friends I do love and cherish.

But on the other hand I know what the First Presidency's has said and I see this as one of those, "Well God has commanded me to leave the city, I don't want to leave the city, I like it here, but its what God has asked me to do" type things. Do I have the faith to "leave the city" or do I stay and take my chances with whatever happens to the city ignoring his warning to leave. Do I follow Lehi and his family? Or do I stay and enjoy the last few days before the city is destroyed knowing that it will happen. Or do I decide that because I like the city that the warning was a false warning, then act surprised when the city is destroyed?

An interesting side note, the court not only overturned Prop 22, but it also overturned the 1978 "one man one wife" amendment. Given what is happening with the FLDS church in Texas, I wonder how this will play out here now that all forms of marriage is protected in California.

I'm not a mean person!

2008-05-15T10:21:00.000-07:00

I know I can sometimes come off as judgmental and mean. What I think that a lot of people forget is that I struggle just as hard as the next person. I have my issues. I'm not perfect. A lot of what I say are things I need to hear myself.

Someone told me the other day that I sometimes go about it the wrong way. I thought about that, what is the right way?

Thats a hard one. Its one I've been pondering. Its not easy. I think sometimes however perception is what determines a lot of what we think is persecution. Its like the difference between a sermon and kind advice from a friend who has been there. I think again its the way we take it.

People talk about support. What we consider support is a funny thing. Support should hold us up as we grow, not enable us to make mistakes and feel okay with them. Real support is firm and sometimes not always what we want to hear if it goes against what we want. Then it becomes preachy and we don't want to listen.

Its ironic how many of the more gay friendly bloggers can offer support such as: "Be true to your self and your feelings, stop letting the church control your life, the church has it wrong, its just old men who don't understand, God wants you to be happy and being gay will make you happy." And its okay. Its not preachy, its supportive.

But if someone stands up for what they believe is Gods side. The side they believe is true they are often attacked. Told not to judge, to take the beam out of your own eye, its not your place to judge, etc. etc. etc.

The problem is that if you do care about someone you don't want them to be hurt and you know that some things will hurt them. I honestly do care about people.

I think we sometimes like to isolate ourselves from feeling bad. I am terribly sorry if I've ever come off as mean or hate filled. That isn't the case. I feel bad if people think that. But on the other hand I won't be the sort of friend who tells you what you want to hear just to make you feel better about yourself if I know in the long run it will lead you to falling away. I won't be party to that.

Following the Prophet

2008-05-13T10:06:00.000-07:00

After the death of the Prophet Joesph when the Saints were left on their own to follow "in faith" instead of following "by example" so to speak, there were many who had stepped up to "assume" the mantel.

When Brigham Young encountered a meeting of the body of the Saints that had gathered to hear Sydney Rigden preach that he was the prophets chosen spokesperson and therefore he should lead the Saints, Brother Brigham stood and addressed the body which included the quorum of the Twelve.

Instead of asking at first who the saints should appoint as their next leader, he said something really interesting. He told the crowd that no matter who they picked, the quorum who he believed now held the keys or Rigden, who claimed to be the prophets successor - they better follow whomever they pick as they did Joseph and not just follow until they are told something they don't agree with and change their minds.

Later he would say that it takes more then a belief of testimony of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the church or the prophet. Just having those makes us no better then Satan and his angels who not only have a testimony of those things but an actual belief based on knowledge which is something we don't have, we only have faith. If they didn't they wouldn't be working do hard to destroy it. Its takes actions. It takes putting your actions behind that faith and doing.

He also said that no matter what it is the Spirit that matter most. No matter what it is the Spirit that will confirm truth of all things.

If we choose to follow the Prophet only when we agree with him, what is the point of having a prophet? God does not require blind faith as some would say following the prophet implies. He does expect complete faith not half hearted faith when it sounds good. He expects us to try our best. That's the key. He expects us to pray, use the Spirit and try our best. Yes, we need to pray about things and yes we need to seek the guidance of the Holy Ghost in doing so, but if we have a testimony of the restored gospel then part of that is in the calling and sacred duties of the prophet.

When the Prophet speaks as a man he is a man, for instance I'm sure there are things Pres Monson likes that I don't. Just because he likes a certain flavor of ice cream or something like that doesn't make it the inspired choice. But when he speaks as the Prophet he speaks for the Lord.

Sometimes the truth hurts

2008-05-10T17:50:00.000-07:00

Yes, Heavenly Father love us no matter what, but that doesn't give us a blank slate to draft our own set of personal commandments. And yes we do need to be tolerant to other faiths who may believe different then us, but that doesn't make them right. And we do have to respect the agency of those within our faith who either choose not to follow them or who mess up. You can do this without lowering your own standards.

Moral standards are sets of guidelines based on commandments of God and if lived they ensure that we keep those commandments. Yes, there are sometimes difference in the commandments and standards of the church and the cultural hedges we put up around the commandments. But when it comes to homosexuality its pretty set.

I was thinking about this. I think that sin as defined is anything that separates us from God. So it really doesn't matter what the sin is. I think part of why self lothing becomes an issue is that we begin to dwell on it and our happiness more then we dwell on our desire to live in such a way that pleases God. There is a gradual slide between wanting to believe that we can be happy and a good person and live a lifestyle that is sinful. And since we are good people how can we do evil. God knows our hearts right?

This fosters the whole "my relationship is with God and not the church" when we start to feel that since we are good people, what we want to make us happy is what God approves of because God wants us to be happy. Then pride takes over.

To throw out a standard because its too hard to follow or because its caused pain for the person who is unable to cope with the reality of it is rather shortsighted. Now yes we need to be Christlike and loving and understanding and help those who do struggle. When something is of worth it is often hard. What if someone who doesn't struggle has issues with not waiting to have sex before he is married. And has sex then feels guilty about it and kills himself. Do we blame God for saying that sex before marrige is a sin and its what caused his guilt and pushed him to kill himself? Yes, suicide is tragic and my heart goes out to those who have ended their lives, but its not an excuse for removing moral standards set in place by God. Only God can do that and he does that through his prophets.

We all want to be happy. But sometimes the hard cruel reality is that what we want and what the Lord wants isn't the same. He loves us and wants to bless us. He doesn't want to be separated from us. I think when we look at that as the real reason He has commandments, to prevent us from doing things that would separate us from Him and less as restrictions we can see that He does love us. When you factor in the atonement all He's done his love is abundant. He hates sin not because He doesn't want us to be happy or enjoy life, but because He knows the end results, He knows what will hurt us, what is real and what isn't and He knows that there are certain things we can do which if He is to be just, divine law dictates that there is justice and the last thing He wants is to be separated from us.

Its His work and His Glory is to bring to pass our eternal life and for us to inhareit what he has. He knows our actions can prevent that. So he has done everything in his power to warn us and protect us. He does this out of love and not vengefulness. He knows sometimes we want things that we think will make us happy but he knows will rob us of our eternal potential and thats why they are sin. Not because he is a cruel God who doesn't want us to be happy. Our happiness is in us becoming like him.

My Brother - Some Clarification

2008-05-07T12:38:00.000-07:00

I think perhaps a little more explanation is in order. I have received a couple letters asking me if perhaps my feelings are based more on jealousy then anything else.

Thats an interesting question. One that I think may have been yes at first but not so much anymore. Yes at first I think it would be fun to act out, but then I see the results.

The more and more the years pass I see how more and more he is unhappy with things. he makes a ton more money them me. But its all in an effect to be happy. Going from one religion or philosophy to the next. His house looks like a shrine to every no Christian faith out there and never really finding what he had once. I also have noticed something. My family while very argumentative is largely accepting. He has been able to bring his "roommate" home for dinner at times. Its not that he isn't "accepted" its that he is trying to be unaccepted so he can have something to be upset about.

When we have dinner it is normally him who baits conversations to try to start conflict. We are all trying hard to get along and we smile at his comments and change the subject but he continues to push buttons until someone gets upset and flairs up. Its not normally one of us who does it or provokes it. I have actually met some of his ex's who have asked me why in some ways we are so similar but the spirit about us is different. That I don't seem to have this vindictive streak and all I can say is that while I struggle I'm not bitter.

The worst thing in the world is to be bitter about not having anything to really be bitter about. I like to think of it as the "Poor Upper Middle Class White Boy Syndrome, the activitist of the month club." He is largely accepted by everyone in my ward, when he comes, yes they think what he is doing is wrong, but no one has ever turned their back on him. He has home teachers in his ward and they visit him and he is being fellowshipped. He is welcomed.

I do love him. I do feel sorry for him. He is still my brother. I can't say that I would ever really choose to be his friend if I met him socially and we weren't related. But I think I would try. It is hard to be friends with someone who is always trying to "out" you or attack the Gospel you hold dear. It doesn't feel good when you are constantly called a blind sheep.

To wrap both of these items up into one and to thank Kam for the love and concern he has expressed in his heartfelt post let me just say this. Thank you.

Finally, there are many good and wonderful things in this world. There are many good and wonderful situations we can place ourselves in. There are also many good and wonderful people we can try to associate and be friends with. We also have our families and wards and such. A lot of this is what we bring into these situations, friendships and environments. A lot of what we take out of them has to do with what we are willing to invest in them.

And yes there are places that the spirit doesn't dwell and we should avoid and people who will drag us down who we should also avoid. But in all cases we should always be willing to love. Sometimes we need to look deeper into their motivation. Is it perhaps pain that is causing it and will loving them help? Last week in priesthood someone pointed out the difference between being friendly and being a friend. You can go to church and have everyone be friendly and still leave lonely. Sometimes we need to leave our groups, make room for one more and actually be a friend.

People often quote the KJV of the Bible in saying we shouldn't judge, I think we need to sometimes. The JST clarifies this in saying we should never condemn. We do need to judge what is best for us. Is this selfish? I do think sometimes we confuse selfishness with looking out for what is best for ourselves. We need to do this. Its imperative for our own emotional health. If we don't do this we can never really help others. We need to be okay with ourselves and our feelings before we can ever try to help another person do the same. Sometimes and I'll admit maybe in the case of me and my brother, I see too much of myself in him to want to reach out because its painful. And yes I need to get past that.

My brother

2008-05-04T10:37:00.000-07:00

My brother is gay. I say gay because he has embraced his attractions as who he is and has boyfriends etc.

Of my two brothers I think him and I are the most similar but we are also the most poler oppistes. He is as liberal as I'm conservative and as far as the church goes he sees it as something that controls you and thinks for you. Ironicly he also has tried every form of religion to be spiritual because I think he in his heart misses the truth that he knows is in the gospel but doesn't want to accept the restrictions of the commandments.

The thing I've noticed about him is his extreme bitterness and how he is sure that everyone is a closet case. He's wanted to out me for most of his life and refers to me to his gay friends as his "older gay brother who is repressed." I think what keeps me from being totally honest with him is that I can see a lot of who I COULD be in him if I was to give up.

I feel bad because on one hand I know that I could be a good friend and support to him but on the other I don't know if thats what he really wants.

Its been hard on my family. Who are denial of it. I sometimes wonder if my mom knows about me. I've opened up to my bishop but thats about it.

I do have a testimony of the restored gospel. I don't hide in the church. For me the Church is a reality not a way to repress things. I know that the gospel of Jesus Christ is the only way to be happy. The temple is the only way to secure the blessings of eternity and that living the commandments is the only way to do that. I'm not deceiving myself. This isn't my culture telling me this. This isn't my way of hiding. I know its real. I don't believe that when it comes to commandments from God that one thing is right for one person and another wrong. God is no respecter of persons. We have a prophet and he is the one who God reveals truth through. Not my own lusts or will. I don't think allowing myself to do what feels good to be happy is really following the Lord.

I wish I could be more loving towards him but when I'm around him all I feel is bitterness. I know that one day I need to overcome this. I know that God loves him as much as he loves me. But I feel like he thinks the church is some cute little way that I hide from reality. I feel like he is mocking something I hold sacred. I don't see the benefit of opening up to someone who is just going to go and use it as a weapon against you in his quest to be happy. I don't know if that makes any since at all.

Marketing Normality

2008-04-29T11:49:00.000-07:00

I wrote this in response to someone who had mentioned that the guys depicted on the Northstar Website all seemed to be very attractive and wondered about this. For the record I did not say that it was Ty on the cover of his book.

*********

Let's be honest with ourselves how many guys do you honestly see clicking on it if the guys didn't look that way?

My background is public relations and marketing and what is going on here is no different then what other websites and magazines do everyday. Even the church does it in its media campaigns and magazines photos.

Its not so much of a glorification of perfection, youth, ideal body size, hair or style. Its more about an accepted standard of comfortable perceived normality. These models are on one hand very attractive and do draw our attention. On the next level there is nothing remarkably distracting about them that will take away from the message that is being projected. The are comfortable set dressings.

Everyone wants to be and feel normal. Like it or not those images personify normality within the culture we live in. Its easier to hear messages and accept them from people who appear normal and thus make us feel normal.

Many of us read Ty's book because we already knew him. However for those who don't and are in that section of Deseret Book, who randomly pick up the book or are looking for a non threatening book on a very intimidating topic, the photo is effective. This is a good looking guy, on the surface someone who looks like he shouldn't have issues. So the potential reader wonders "What? How can someone like this who looks so normal live a life in quiet desperation?" This is a very effective method to get the message out.

How many photo illustrations in the Ensign portray what Sacrament meeting is really like? The one I went to today had sleepy people, tired and stressed out parents. A lot of overweight people stuffed into shirts to small for them. Lots of pew monkeys, cheerios and screaming kids. I was thumbing through the Ensign and there was a picture of a large young family sitting in church. I don't know what they put in the Cheerios in that ward but its not like and ward I've sat in.

People don't want to be reminded of reality. Those who are into marketing and design know this. Perfection and the perceived normality are tools advertisers use everyday to get their message out. People see it and imagine they relate to the happy, smiley good looking people.

In this case the Northstar, Ty's book and the Ensign have positive messages. Using the most effective tools to spread that message isn't a bad thing. Now yes I admit that I don't fit the image of the guys on the site and yeah it would be cool to see a few "realistic" looking images. But its the message that is more important.

Is this being part of the world or using their methods? Yes to a degree, but as Elder Bednar has said some of our best tools to reach the world are found there, but you have to turn them 180 degrees.

Now yes I do think we need to be more accepting. And yes I think it is wrong to assume that just because someone is thin and therefore attractive, wears Auerostle or A&F or has that faux-moho-hauck is somehow more worthy, normal, less needy or deserving of friendship or Christlike love. Yes, maybe they are easier to accept and love because such association may make us feel "normal" but that kind of normal is what does breed clicks and ites.

I believe this is truly what living in the world but not being of the world means.

FHE and my friend Dan

2008-04-24T19:17:00.000-07:00

I wanted to write about an experience this past conference trip. I haven't had time because I've been on a deadline to finish. But I feel like if I don't write about it, I would be proving myself unworthy of the blessings I received.

Also I apologize for the style this is written in. The only way I feel I can express this is to dramatize it a bit, including dialog so that it reads more like a story. This is very personal to me and I wanted to share it with you guys.

. . . FHE and My Friend Dan . . .

Sitting in a car driving through the Nevada desert at night is typically boring. I decided to come out for conference and I brought a friend. A friend who doesn't struggle with SGA and didn't know that I did either.

Conference would be cool. I work for a newspaper so we would have media passes. This means we get into all the sessions and don't have to wait in lines. And yes we are working, this is awesome because when I get home, I get to write about conference and share it with those not of our faith who read the paper. We get to take pictures and all that. We would be able to meet the new apostle and YW Presidency, and attend the press conferences for them.

It was after conference that I was worried about.

I was a little concerned about the Matis FHE. I really wanted to go, I had made some personal resolutions to mend some fences with some of the guys there.

The speaker was someone I've become an accidental fan of over the years. I had met him when he played "Joseph" in "Savior of the World." I hadn't realized it, I was more interested in meeting the actress playing "Mary." But I was looking at my ticket and realized he had signed it. A year or so later he played Alma Richards in "Light of the World," a production performed at the Conference Center during the 2002 Winter Olympics in SLC. Later I met him again at Deseret Books and he signed a CD. He played Hyrum Smith in the new Joseph Smith movie shown at the Joseph Smith Memorial Building and that new movie about Emma Smith.

The problem was, how do I explain FHE to my friend without explaining the purpose or more specifically the people attending the FHE without "outing" myself.

I had a couple of the speakers CD's, I played on the way hoping to spark some interest at which I could then go into "Well actually if you like his work, I know how you can meet him," type thing. But that didn't happen. I than told him that Monday I would probably go to family FHE and so if there was anything he wanted to do then he could do it. He said, "No, I'm cool with whatever you want to do."

I was kind of stuck.

Being together with someone for 11 hours is a good way to get to know them. At first I wasn't really sure if he wanted to come, he had tried to bring several people along and then when they bowed out asked if we could cut the trip short. Leave on Wednesday. Dan had always struck me as someone I should get to know; I think it was his eyes or something. He seemed to understand things. The only problem was that I don't think he knew he understood things. By the end of the trip to Utah we would learn a lot about each other, that we both struggle with different but equally challenging things that kept us from being open completely to those around us. That we are both more alike then different. And we ended up staying the whole week.

**********

Earlier that morning we had had lunch at Dee's and this server who must have assumed we were a couple started telling us of some cool things we could do in Utah as long as we didn't let the fact that it was a “theocracy” bother us. He then scribbled his number on the City Weekly.

I ask Dan over our Wisconsin Cheese Soup, if he could tell that the server liked guys

"No, he's not, he was just being nice." I chucked and said, "Dan he was inviting us to go to Gossip on Saturday night after priesthood."

By Sunday night Dan had met a couple SGA friends who are trying very hard to be faithful and who are living the gospel and a couple openly gay friends who weren't. As we were laying in the dark, he asked me outright. "What do you think about it? Do you think its a choice?"

I asked him, "Well do you choose to like girls?"

I asked him how he would feel if during the Priesthood Session if Pres Monson announced that from here-on-out men were to only be attracted to men and date and marry other men and that having sex with women was an abomination. "Would you be able to deal with that?" That he would have to “change” his attraction.

He said he never thought of it that way. He always just thought that guys could just change. "But what does the church feel about it? I mean I know it's a sin?" he asked.

I was sleeping on the couch, he was in his sleeping bag on the floor. It was about 4 a.m. conference was still fresh in our minds. We were tired, but at the point where we weren't sleepy. I told him about the pamphlet and what it says. Two days of being exposed to the gospel accompanied by the Mormon Tabernacle Choir tends to do that to you.

I then told him I had been praying that he would ask me about this because there was something I needed to ask him.

I then told him about Brother and Sister Matis and their son, their book, and I told him about the FHE they host. I told him about the guys who go there. I also told him that I would never put him in a situation where he felt awkward and if he didn't want to go I'd understand.

"I would really like to go," he said. "You know up until now I never really thought about it. I mean I know that there are gay people, but I've never really thought about there being gay people who are trying to be faithful to the church. I guess I don't understand because they still like guys but they are choosing not to act on it. That must really be hard," he said.

"So are you telling me that those guys we stayed with are like that, that they are trying hard and being faithful? He asked. “Do you think they can change?"

I asked him again if he could change and like guys? Than I asked him how he would feel if he loved something as much as we both loved the church but at the same time knew it felt about something that feels to us?

*******

A friend of mine was letting us barrow his condo. It was awesome, but he had friends over the night before so we couldn't actually stay there until that night when they left to play in Moab. Its funny how we come to Utah for conference and a lot of people from Utah escape during the week.

It turned out also that a good friend and former co-worker also just happened to be driving with her friend through Utah that night and called me thinking I was at home wondering if I knew anyone in SLC that they could crash. This was why we were sleeping downstairs and the two girls were upstairs in the bedrooms.

The night before we stayed with two friends who also struggle. Dan was oblivious to this fact. After the server incident he had decided that his gaydar didn't work.

That morning I got a text message from one of the friends asking me if Dan was going to come with us or not. I told him yes.

"You do know there will be gay people there." Was the next response.

I was tempted to say something about how we will just tell him that this was a ward that had a large Elders Quorum who happened to all be really well dressed and share the same affinity for faux hocks, girl pants, tight polo shirts and Aqua Gio. But I didn't.

My friend didn't know that Dan already knew.

*********

So we set off to have lunch with another friend and his friend and friends of his friends. Two of them were planning on going to FHE with us.

After lunch and touring around downtown SLC we headed back to the apartment to pool rides to Lehi. I told Dan that one of the guys we were staying with was panicking because he was going. I told him about the message.

Pulling a face and sounding very GA-ish he said, "Now Jerry, we both know that the correct way to refer to it is Same Gender Attracted and not gay."

I could have hugged him, but I punched him instead. It seemed like the most hetro-way to show affection at the moment. We decided to pull the same joke on my panicking friend when we got upstairs.

*********

On the way home from Family Home Evening Dan thanked me.

"You know besides General Conference, I think this will be one of the highlights of my trip," he said. I sat next to him and thought about the anxiety I had been plagued with the few days before we left when I wondered how I was going to either invite him or ditch him so I could come.

"Those people are awesome and the love they show is so Christlike," he said referring to Brother and Sister Matis.

As we drove back to Salt Lake we marveled at how bright the temples were.

"You know this trip has changed my outlook," he said. "I think I will never look at people and their struggles the same again. We all have struggles and those things are things we deal with. It's how you handle them, how you act on them that determines if things are a sin or not. A lot of those guys are really trying and struggling with something really hard, it makes me want to try harder also."

We sat quietly for a bit. I wondered why he hadn't asked me if I struggled? He explained that it didn't matter to him as my friend, and it only mattered how I choose to deal with it and that was between God and me.

"Jerry, thank you for bringing me tonight," he said. "I think I needed to see this in order to realize this and learn that lesson."

We sat quietly a little more and then he added.

"Oh and Jerry, there was a lot of faux hocks, girl pants, tight polo shirts and Aqua Gio there wasn't there?!"

We both busted up laughing.

The Pitfalls of Mormon Gay Pride

2008-03-24T21:59:00.000-07:00

I still wonder about the wisdom of feeling like you need to tell everyone. I mean I do feel in some ways you are just asking to be labeled. I understand the need to tell close friends and those you want to seek out for support, but if this is beginning to sound like some people want to organize their own little gay pride parades within their wards.

At some point we are just going to have to admit that if we act on our urges it is a sin. Let me repeat it, acting on homosexuality is a sin. Accept it. No we aren't sinners for having those urges. But if we insist on clinging to the labels and demand to be respected for it I think its rather the same as those people who are demanding they be recognized for being gay and who feel its something to be have pride in.

Do people who struggle with other sins have pride in those struggles? No! I'm not saying we should think we a good or bad people because of it it, I'm just saying that we are people, like everyone else and its time we stop trying to let ourselves be defined by it. Are we going to live the rest of our lives allowing our struggles to be what defines our relationship with Heavenly Father? If we serve missions? If we get married? If we stay faithful to the church? And yes if we inhariet the Celestial Kingdom.

Should be stop talking about the evils of drinking because their are recovering alcoholics in the quorum? How about smoking or drug use? Maybe there is a closet chain smoker or pothead that we may offend. Should we not discuss the evils of porn because there are a few guys who are battling an addiction to it? Should we not discuss the evils of divorce because there is a member of the quorum who is going through one. Should we not talk about the evils of abortion and same gender marriage because it is viewed as a political topic and shouldn't be discussed in church because we may offend someone who tends to support the more liberal political parties? It is possible to become so over sensitized that any priesthood lesson on any topic will offend someone so perhaps we should just avoid church all together to avoid being offended.

And yes we do need to be more sensitive and more loving and more understanding. And we need to teach that we love the sinner not the sin, but as people grow and mature in the gospel so does their capacity for that. Sometimes what may come off as homophobia on the part of that sweet sister who says those insensitive words is just the by product of her trying to avoid something that is wicked and that at the same time she has had no real personal expirence with. Maybe she has only seen the stereotypes on TV who knows, she just knows that the Lord wants her to avoid it.

There are some people who no matter what won't understand. For whatever reason. I don't want to become the "gay member of the quorum" or every time a question about homosexuality arises I get called on. I also don't want to be the source of people not feeling like they can speak their minds or feel they have to treat me with kid gloves.

I think we need to enter into all things with wisdom. And no we can't let our fears guide us. But at the same time we need to use some common sense here. This is something that we do need to overcome and control or it can lead us to apostatize and leave the church. This isn't something we should have pride in. No its not something we should be ashamed of and if we have never acted out or if we have and have repented or even if we haven't but feel the urge to do so and are working to that its something we should be working to not let control us. Its something we should control. But its not who we are unless we let it be.

When Answers don't come or the Spirit Feels Far Away

2008-03-24T16:41:00.003-07:00

As I get older and older, and as I look back at some of my past mistakes and lessons I've learned I've come to realize that one of my greatest problems in being in tune with the Spirit is often my attitude that the spirit accepts me on my terms.

I can be very rebellious and stuburn, and do things and think things that would distance myself from the influence of the Holy Ghost. But if I'm ever in need and demand that God bless me or the Spirit guide me I often think that I expect the Lord and the Holy Ghost to obey me unconditionally. I think that if they were to be loyal to me in the same way I've often been loyal to them, they would never come around.

The funny thing is when they aren't, I then begin to doubt them and think I start to think I know better. I've learned that sometimes this means I need to step back and accept that maybe I'm the one at fault here and its not them that have distanced themselves from me, but its me who has driven that wedge.

There are times when I need to look at my life. Am I doing things that make the Holy Ghost want to dwell with me. Am I providing an environment conducive to the spirit? Am I reading the things that inspire me? am I dwelling in places that up lift me?

When I see people seemly happy doing things that I've been taught are wrong, and I dwelling on the eternal? Am I visiting the great and spacious building dreading having to go back to holding the iron rod? Do I really want to be happy doing the things that are right? Or am I always going to resent not having what I have to sacrifice in order to obtain what I'm promised. Do I want to be happy?

Do I put the Lord's ways before the worlds ways. Do I put being tolerant and open minded in the worlds way before standing for something on the Lords side? Whose side do I want to be found on when all is said and done?

There are times also when I think that we often would rather take council from our fears because it doesn't take any real faith to do that. We can accept our fears as fact comfortable because it does give us a net to fall into. It takes faith to rely on God and his promises. I think that a lot of times its easier to accept the words of people who help us justify our weaknesses then to accept God's promises that through him weak things can be made strong.

We also need to remember who is the author of fears.

These are things I often ponder when I feel like the Lord isn't answering my prayers. I sometimes wonder if he did would I really want the answer. And sometimes I also realize that I already know the answer to what I'm praying for, I just don't like the answer and want another.

I know this is sorta a different post, but its things I've been thinking about lately. Sometimes instead of trying to change the world I think I need to turn inward and change my heart so that I can accept the things that I already know to be true. I think that sometimes thats the hardest thing to do.

The Least of the Strays

2008-03-19T16:08:00.000-07:00

A few months ago I observed something really interesting. For the past few days this really tiny, malnourished and mangy kitten had been hanging out on our doorstep, much to the chagrin of my cat and dog who try to chase it away. We know it's there at night because it sets off the motion sensors all night long.

When I came home from church that Sunday it was hot and so I put some water out for the poor creature. It immediacy ran away and then slowly came back. A few hours later, I went out to check and it had drunk all the water. I gave it some more.

The next day I went out and this time the kitten would come up to me cautiously and started to meow. He wouldn't let me pet him but he would brush up against my leg.

The next day I found my dad had started giving it Spotacus' left over tuna. Spotacus is “the cat in residence.” Spot is spoiled and won't eat anything but tuna. So the poor little cat outside was getting a treat. At this point the kitten will now let you pet him. And will meow if he sees you walk past the door.

This whole time my dad is saying, "Don't get attached to the cat, we aren't keeping him."

A few mornings later I went outside and my dad was brushing the cat. It was no longer mangy looking. There was enough hair to make another small cat. I put antibiotics on its ear were the other cat would attack it. It cuddled up next to me and purred.

The funny thing was the whole time my dad was out there, my dog Rudy and the Spot paced back and forth inside, Rudy was yapping at my mom as to say, "Do you know what your husband is doing? Don’t you think you should get up and stop him before he’s allowed in the house?" Spot just sat on the table looking out the window indignant and giving off disapproving looks of disdain.

When my dad came in the house, the new improved cat, now about a pound thinner of hair and no longer bony looking sat on the porch the dog ran to the screen door and snapped at it. However, this time it didn't run away. My dad yelled at Rudy and the dog looked my dad and ran to me mom to hide.

I thought about this. I love my dog and cat. I think they are the most loyal and neat animals out there. Well maybe the dog, I think cats are just out for themselves. I think in the cats mind, it owns us. But at any rate I wasn't really proud of how they were treating this new cat. I realize they may just be being territorial, or protective and that's what animals do. I remember how Spot first reacted to Rudy when he came here. That was a less then hospitable welcome.

This poor kitten for some reason or another picked our house over all the other houses on the drive, for some reason it felt safe, even if it was constantly being attacked by Spot and Rudy. We fed it gave it some shelter and it started to trust us. My dad brushed it and it looks like a completely new cat. Now we need to figure out what to call it.

The other two animals don't want to accept it and for some reason or another exclude it even attack it and make no effort to try to include it.

I wonder how often I act like this? I have a loving Heavenly Father, but He isn't just my Heavenly Father He is everyone’s Heavenly Father, even all the stray cats and dogs out there. And yes even those people who may not believe in him.

We show Him we love Him by loving "one another." I think sometimes we instinctively act, the natural man takes over. The difference between us and the animal kingdom is that we have intelligence far beyond these house pets who act on instinct. But even with these we can be very choosy about who we find worthy of loving and showing that same Christlike love. I know eventually the two pets will adapt to this yet to be named new member of the family. But are we always that willing to do the same with each other?

"And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me." (Matt. 25:40.)

Road Kill on the Information Superhighway

2008-03-13T19:39:00.000-07:00

I was answering e-mail last night. Picture this, me, 40 or some years from now. I'm sitting there with my grandkids on my lap, I'm a grumpy old man.
I talking to them, much like my dad did to me when he told me how things were in "The good old days."

One of them has just found a cache of old letters and looks at me in wonder. "Grandpa, what are these?" he asked.

"Oh, they are called letters, we used to mail them in things called envelopes with things called stamps," I reply.

That was of course before e-mail and the Internet.

I remember the first time I heard the term "Information Super Highway." At he time it wasn’t a cliché. I was sitting in my mass communication class at Shasta College and my professor started to talk about how it will be the road map to the future.

At the time there was no mention of the "World Wide Web" in my textbook and in the index of my book it went from "interact" to "interest" without stopping at "Internet." Now it seems I get more e-mail then regular mail. And yes it has become a fun way to keep in touch with my friends but it hasn’t come without disadvantages
either.

Last Thursday I turned 36. I remember getting cards in the mail. This year while I received lots of happy birthday “blings” on MySpace and Facebook. I didn’t receive anything in the mail. It was sorta depressing. Of course only five years ago we never had said things like; “What’s your myspace?” or “Okay I’ll add you,” or the dreaded “You are deleted.”

I think the same thing that is supposed to be drawing us closer together as a community has also done the exact opposite.

I always thought it was funny when I walked into the computer lab at Chico State and there were about 40 or so people sitting there at computers, another 40 waiting in line. None of them were actually doing papers, they were either online, answering e-mail or chatting. Most of them were either on MySpace.

The nosy person I am, I took an informal poll once, meaning I actually talked to the people sitting next to me and discovered this person wasn’t chatting with anyone far away, he was chatting with another students in other buildings on campus. This was about the time of Valentine’s Day and he started to complain about being alone. These people seemed to be depressed because they were alone, but none of them were willing to venture past their keyboards to do something about it. Worse, if you attempted to talk with any of them they got upset, because you where interrupting them. How social is that?

I’m just as guilty. I know have a Blackberry Curve, it’s the coolest thing. I can chat, text, check all those social websites all on my phone. Yes, the world is now my Internet café.

But technology has also wrecked havoc on more traditional forms of communications.

Call me old fashioned, but there is just something really nice with getting real mail. It’s more personal, you feel like someone took the time to actually sit down and put pen to paper, not to mention correct punctuation. Now we type long paragraphs, sometimes all in caps and spelling is sort of a formality reserved for rare occasions.

And forwards. This is about the most annoying thing this side of a Jim Carey movie. In the real world if I bundled all my junk mail into a big envelope and sent it to a friend they would probably not enjoy it much. I didn’t know I had so many friends who worked for foreign governments who needed help getting money into the country, or that the real answer to my prayers comes from sending the same message to 50 of my best friends.

And phone calls. This new fun little toy is after all a phone. I like talking to people. Now I mostly just get text messages. Today I got a number of messages that said “Hey, LOL! happy b-day, g2g, ttyl.”

On Building Heges and Fences Around Laws

2008-03-08T11:43:00.000-08:00

One of the things Latter-day Saints like to do is to build hedges or fences around laws. We don't watch R-rated movies, we don't date until we are 16. Mission rules are a good example of this and yes even the Honor Code. It is my personal opinion that these hedges or fences mirror those Laws of Moses that were given when the children of Israel were unready or unwilling to accept the law.

Is there something wrong with ALL R-rated movies? Of course not. Are some 16 year-olds emotionally mature enough to handle dating? Of course there are, there are many I think that are more mature than a lot of adults I know.

Interestingly enough when the current version of "For the Strength of Youth" was released R-rated movies was changed to movies that portray themes that are counter
to the gospel.

It has always amused me that BYU would have to rewrite the Honor Code to "make it more clear." What on earth is unclear about the fact that acting on urges is a sin and promoting anything that does encourage doing so is prohibited"

Notice I didn't even mention homosexuality here. I said urges and sin. I think that general statement applies to anything that would lead to sin. Lets change the word urge to temptations. Are there some temptations that we feel we can handle? That general statement should eliminate the specificness that should ALREADY be understood if you understand the Gospel. Avoid temptations that lead to fueling urges that lead to acting on sins. That's pretty simple. But isn't that what they taught us in Primary?

Do I need the church to rewrite the commandments so that I know the letter of the law when I attend a non church school? I would think those blessed enough to attend BYU on a sacred scholarship - BYU is funded by tithing, SHOULD be keenly aware of what is church doctrine. The spirit of the law should be what leads those students to want to be faithful and not look for loopholes. Many of those have served two years preaching this doctrine. Aren't these supposed to be the best and brightest young minds the church has brought up. Why does it need to be further clarified to them? Why do we need to build additional walls and hedges around laws that are already well established?

Or are we like the children of Israel, unready or perhaps unwilling to accept a law for what it is? Do we need the walls and hedges that often become substitute laws and often become what people feel is the law? If missionaries could be trusted to live the law I think except for a few circumstances there would be no need for mission rules. And I think most do. If a few BYU students would just accept the law they
wouldn't need to have the hedges or fences rebuild for them. Do we need to have the law rewritten so that it makes us feel better about ourselves? Why can't we just accept that certain things are sinful and just not do them?

It's the same with this pamphlet. We know what is and what isn't a sin. We really shouldn't have to have it spelled out for us. The Lord gives His children knowledge "line upon line, precept upon precept. What this tells me is that apparently the Church isn't ready for the whole law because we already have issues with the portions of the law that we already have and need these hedges and fences to
keep us from breaking it.

On subtle nuances and poorly worded doctrine

2008-03-07T19:38:00.000-08:00

In a recent post someone cited a paragraph from the new pamplet from the church related to same gender attraction. The writer later said he felt it was poorly worded.

"[A]void any influence that can harm your spirituality. One of these adverse influences is obsession with or concentration on same-gender thoughts and feelings. It is not helpful to flaunt homosexual tendencies or make them the subject of unnecessary observation or discussion. It is better to choose as friends those who do not publicly display their homosexual feelings. The careful selection of friends and mentors who lead constructive, righteous lives is one of the most important steps to being productive and virtuous. Association with those of the same gender is natural and desirable, so long as you set wise boundaries to avoid improper and unhealthy emotional dependency, which may eventually result in physical and sexual intimacy. There is moral risk in having so close a relationship with one friend of the same gender that it may lead to vices the Lord has condemned. Our most important relationships are with our own families because our ties to them can be eternal."

I know that some may feel this was poorly written. I couldn't disagree with this more. I think it says what it needs to say period. It couldn't be any more blunt and to the point. I think the more we spend time reading the words and spending time around people who would encourage us to "fall away" to "be true to ourselves" the more and more we stand at risk at doing just that. I know in his heart these people are trying
to be good friends and trying to help us. But they are wrong. And yes I have many dear friends who consider themselves gay. Who think its great that I stay in the church. Because its "for me." But its not "for them." But I will also admit to a certain degree of sadness because if what I or any faithful member of the church believes "it's for all of us." I can only have faith and love them and not give up on them. But in the end unless they don't choose to change they are wrong and I hope in the final judgment God doesn't look to me and say, "why didn't you warn them?"

As for this this pamplet. It was approved by the First Presidency. Had it needed to be rewritten I think the Prophet would have seen to it.

This is one of the most pressing issues in the Church today. I also think this is an issue that weighs deeply on them. I also know this is an issue that they know they are being scrutinized over rather justly or unjustly. You only need to read some of the blogs that are only a link away on the Northern Lights Blog to get a healthy dose of this sort of loyal opposition.

I know our struggles cause them great pain and anguish. I also know that they know that any thing they say will be carefully scrutinized both within and outside the church by both the faithful, those looking for loop holes and those looking for further truth to add to their arsenal against the church. I would say that every comma and every period in this booklet was very carefully worded so as not to be taken anyway other then the intended meaning.

That's why I bristle with the references to "moho's" and "coming out" again I know that language and intent can be nuanced. But I don't think this was Elder Oaks intent, I do think he meant that we aren't to see ourselves as such less we start to think we are doomed to this with no hope.

I think that Satan is a great deceiver. He is able to mask sin under civil rights. I think he even is able to use God's greatest gift of agency to promote it and Christ's own words not to judge as a means to protect it. I think he is able to use some of our smartest men to then stand up and fight for the rights to condone it and accept it and villianize anyone who would stand against it.

No I don't condemn those who may think what I'm saying is wrong. They have their agency to think or believe whatever they want. I'm only going by what I believe and feel. The thing I think we need to remember is that Satan acts with full knowledge. We are react with limited knowledge and opinions fueled by our desires, logic and experiences. Satan can never be forgive for his rebellion because he knew exactly what he was doing. The thing is he already knows he's going to lose and if he can get us to fall even a little bit then we are just a sad consolation prize.

I think we are the ones who need to decide if we are going to have the faith to follow the council given.

Moho's and "ites" in the Church

2008-02-26T17:12:00.000-08:00

I think we show our level of devotion to the gospel by how we take the council of our leaders. For some time now I've really had an issue with the self proclaimed title of "moho" and the way its used by some people to describe themselves and others who struggle with same gender attraction.

I also bristle when I hear people within the Church talk about "coming out."

And it really bothers me after the Brethren have warned over and over in interviews, pamphlets and articles about using the term gay to describe ourselves as people.

I think that the more we accept the worlds way of handling and describing our struggles the more we open ourselves up to Satan to attack us.

Elder Oaks taught: "I think it's important for you to understand that homosexuality, which you've spoken of, is not a noun that describes a condition. It's an adjective that describes feelings or behavior. I encourage you, as you struggle with these

In short the world would have it become the God we worship and base all our decisions on.

While I think many of us are trying to be faithful, I think that we also fall into this trap from time-to-time.

The Book of Mormon warns of "ites" but it seems like there has been a development, a subculture so to speak within the Church of LDS men who struggle who like to define themselves into this community.

Do we refer to other members of the Church who struggle with other problems with other names?

Part of it may be that we don't feel like we fit in and so we are trying to create a community for oursleves where we belong. I think this is very dangerous because with community's come cultures of their own. In the Kingdom of God there are no "ites."

Don't get me wrong. There I think the most important part of trying to be faithful is accepting a challenge as real. I do think that we do need to be honest with those people who do care about us if we feel its something that they can understand and help provide support to us as we strive to stay the course. But I don't see it as a "rite of passage" or a "declaration of independence and of who I really am." When you come
out of something it means to leave something. So if someone is choosing to be faithful, what are they really coming out of?

I also think sometimes, at least I know this is the case in my life that I may pray for something that I want to know or understand that is already pretty clearly explained but that I just don't like the answer so I keep praying hoping to get another answer that I can agree with. I'm not praying in faith. Its more like I have a deck of cards and I'm going to keep drawing a new card until I get the card I want.

If we allow Satan to win us, in a war that we already know he will lose in the end, and if we allow him to use our struggles to help us choose our path and what we are going to do, how we are going to refer to ourselves and what our relationship with the Lord will be, then we have already failed.

I don't want to sound preachy, but we know what is wrong and we know what is right. The Bretheran have been pretty clear about this. Its up to us to choose. No amount of debate or discussion will change basic gospel principles. Yes we need to love and accept and be tolerant. But we also need to have faith and realize that we may never know all the answers in this life. But if we are faithful and follow the
commandments we will one day be blessed with more happiness then we can ever imagine.

The Rock

2008-02-24T17:55:00.001-08:00

The past couple days there has been a lot of discussion on "coming out" or as I think it can be more appropriately put "being honest" or telling others for those of us who struggle but desire to be faithful.

A friend of mine posted something that I think is often overlooked.

.....One close friend cautioned me from telling others because she feels that every time I tell someone I reinforce the label, realigning myself with it as part of my identity......

Elder Oaks gave awesome council to us about not using an adjective that defines our struggle to describe ourselves. I recently told a friend who was debating "telling" to remember that the only real label we should assume is His name. Everything else that we define ourselves by should glorify that.

Sometimes we struggle with things that if we don't succeed we feel we have failed. There is a story about a man that the Lord gave a commandment to try to move this rock.

He spent years and years trying but even with his best efforts never moved the rock even an inch. Satan got wind of this and went to the man and said, "why don't you give up. You haven't moved the rock." Still the man didn't give up.

The man died having failed in his mind. He went to the Lord and asked "Why did you ask me to do something you knew couldn't be done?"

The Lord responded that He never ask him "to move" the rock just to "try."

"Look at yourself, look how your efforts have made you strong, my son you have been faithful and obedient in your efforts and that's what I asked you to do. Now I will move the rock."

I also know that God loves us and wants us to be happy, but I also know that love comes from bending our will to his. This may be our greatest challenge in life. Whatever our struggles are. God greatest blessings come in His time and we have to sometimes endure pain. We can't be guilty of asking God to bless us right now and not be willing to wait on His time. He will answer our prayers but in his own time. And that time is the time that is right for us. I have come to realize that. I learned that after I came to understand what "not my will but his will."

Pres Kimball said that if we look at life on Earth as the whole of existence then it is easy to lose hope. But when viewed in an eternal perspective, we see that these trials teach us. If God took all our trials from us we wouldn't have to live by faith and at the same time agency wouldn't be needed. Its only through our trials that we are able to use our agency to show God we love him enough to choose his will over our own.

Alma wished he could speak with the tongue of an angel but he realized he was just a man. So are we. We are blessed by our obedience and faithfulness and like in the story as long as we are willing to put the effort into moving the rock God promises to do the rest.

Modar

2008-02-18T15:31:00.000-08:00

I shared this with a friend in his blog, but I wanted to share it here because I know it fits.

I don't know why we are attracted to some people and not others. I found when I was on my mission that I was prompted to talk to some people more then others. I also know there have been times when I feel the Lord knows I'm stuburn and uses my struggle as a means to direct me to people who I need to know. I don't know. I guess if I keep close to the Spirit and pray for guidance that I can't really go wrong if I'm suddenly "attracted to someone." If my intentions are pure and I am trying to do whats right I can't go wrong.

However I do know that God won't use bad things to inspire us or put us into situations where we could fall in order to save another person. He loves us all equally. We know our own strengths and weaknesses and should challenge them. But I also know he does sometimes send angels in the form of regular everyday heroes.

I went to a party once with a friend. while I was there a lot of stuff started to happen that was really wrong. First someone put on a movie that was bad and then some of the people begin to pair off and make out yes there were a lot of gay people there and whatnot. I felt uncomfortable. I didn't want to leave because I didn't want to offend my friend, but at the same time I really didn't want to be there.

There was this one guy who I had been watching all night who didn't look like he fit in. He had come with a group of girls and was sitting in the corner of the room. I kept looking at him and noticed that he was at times looking at me. And yes he was attractive. And yes I was drawn to him. But I resisted that urge.

So I went out on the balcony. While I was there the guy followed me out.

He said "hey I noticed you seemed uncomfortable in there," I nodded, it was cold. We were both shivering and you could see our breath.

He said "so did I, I don't know any of those people and thats not really what I believe." He then said "I've been watching you all night and I was wondering why someone like you were here." I told him it was funny because I thought the same thing.

I said I was there because my friend had been in the cast of the play and I was his ride and I was supporting him.

We talked some more and he asked me outright "Are you gay?" I didn't think about it and said, "No I'm Mormon."

He looked stunned and said, "OMG so am I."

I think we both thought the same thing right then because while we both smiled at each other we stood out there in the cold for a few minutes not saying anything.

We both realized that it wasn't so much attraction that made us single each other out. It was that we both had "Modar" that "Mormon Glow" so-to-speak. He said he hadn't been to church since he moved out here but that he missed it. He said he still read the scriptures his mom gave him. He said he had done stuff and felt that he wouldn't be accepted, but that he had prayed every night and hoped to find a friend who would understand.

Yes we do stand out even when we may want to blend in. When we start not to thats when we need to really think about if we are on the right path.

We stayed friends, he moved back to where he was from a few months later. But that night we both probably saved each other from making some stupid mistakes.

I've had this expirence a number of times since than and I think it's proof that the Lord does watch out for us when we let him and sometimes when we don't think he's watching.