Thursday, March 27, 2014
The Poster Children for the Progressive Elite
First, a disclaimer. I am a white, older-middle-aged, middle-class, female, heterosexual, conservative Mormon. That should cover all the bases. I remember where I was when JFK was shot, when the Challenger blew up, and when the Twin Towers fell. I learned as a child that what a person did was more important than what was said, but that what was said (and how it was said) also gave an indication of the internal mindset of the speaker.
There's an old curse that goes "May you live in interesting times." These are definitely "interesting" times. The confluence of rapidly advancing technology, breaking down of traditional mores and societal expectations, and polarization between the major political ideologies has created a perfect storm. It seems well planned and perfectly executed. The institutions that we as a society once counted on--nuclear families, a generally stable economy, strong faith communities and a good educational system--have been gradually eroded away, becoming weak and ineffectual structures that can't perform their purposes. I believe there is an agenda at work here, one that is designed to destroy America as we have known it and replace it with something different.
Since before Woodrow Wilson, Progressives have been working quietly, behind the scenes, to accomplish this feat, gradually pulling apart what had been so carefully woven by our founders. In the past few years, however, this behind-the-scenes undertaking has moved out into the light of day, becoming bolder and more transparent in their endeavors. There is no "official" spokesperson for the Progressive party, but two men seem to have taken up the mantle, albeit unknowingly.
Of the many politicians on the Left who have been in the spotlight lately, one has stood out as a shining beacon of Progressive propaganda. His usual speeches consist of the half-truths, prevarications, misrepresentations, inaccuracies, aspersions and calumniations common to most modern politicians, but he is prone to truth-telling more than any of them. In fact, I have found more truth from him in the past 7 years than from almost any other politician.
I speak, of course, of Joseph Biden, our current Vice President. He is quite good at framing the Progressive agenda in smooth terms and can read a teleprompter as well as his boss. But he sneakily signals the truth behind the lies, cleverly disguised as "gaffes". When I first heard a Biden gaffe ("You cannot go to a 7-11 or a Dunkin' Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent.... I'm not joking."), I laughed along with all the others. As I heard more of them, I realized that these "mistakes" were actually speaking truth. When he said, in 2012, that Obama should be impeached if he unilaterally ordered an attack on a country that wasn't attacking us, it was the truth.
My father was fond of saying "the truth will out." Biden's inability to keep up the lies, his repeated slips of the tongue, show just how anxious he is to tell the truth. For example, the Left insists that they are not racist or prejudiced in any way, and that all racism is held in conservative minds. But, as the first quote above shows, Joe Biden is a racist par excellence. He is even oblivious to his basic attitude, as was my grandmother (God rest her soul), who firmly believed that blacks as a whole were dishonest, shiftless and lazy, but insisted that some of her best friends were black.
In another instance, Biden said, "If we do everything right, if we do it with absolute certainty, there's still a 30% chance we're going to get it wrong." That is also in the pantheon of Biden gaffes, but it's so obviously true. The Democrats weren't listening, but they should have been. The number of scandals plaguing this administration shows just how careless they have been about "doing everything right". Biden is the Left's blue collar Cassandra, his oracular pronouncements constantly misread and dismissed by his friends and his adversaries.
On the other hand, another fiery Liberal speaker, Harry Reid, has no such excuse for his verbal behavior. He seldom says anything he does not consciously intend to say. In August, 2012, he backhandedly accused Mitt Romney of not having paid taxes for the previous ten years, a criminal offense. In the face of heated objection to this smarmy characterization of a private citizen, he continued to hold to the story. In fact, Harry Reid's track record speaks for itself.
Reid is known for speaking his mind, which has made it very clear to Democrats and Republicans that he holds virtually everyone, including Barak Obama, in contempt. He comes across as the ultimate "elite"; no one is his equal, or even close to it. He feels comfortable saying anything scurrilous, defamatory or abusive about anyone, because he feels the truth resides in him, and him alone.
While Biden seems foolish and unable to curb his foot-in-mouth disorder, Reid presents as amoral and conscienceless. Biden doesn't know he's telling the truth; Reid thinks he is telling the truth. These men represent, I believe, two sides of the same coin.
In October, 2008, Barak Obama famously said. "we are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America." That also was the truth, and the majority of Americans simply smiled and nodded, bobble heads in front of the boob tube. Then we were surprised when our country's slide into oblivion, that started off slowly 100 years ago, accelerated to warp speed. The agenda is lies, repeated endlessly. Its proponents are well-versed in rhetoric and deception. But, as the poster children, Biden and Reid keep giving us what we refuse to handle, or come to grips with--the truth.
Friday, February 21, 2014
Common Standards, Uncommonly Shortsighted, Part One
I have been following the progress of the Common Core rollout for several months, and have been increasingly dismayed by the obviously poor standards, the threat of data mining by the Department of Education, and the increasing frustration experienced by my grandchildren as they struggle with nonsense math. Here is one of the things I've been pondering.
"National standards are good. Children can move from one district to another and have the same curriculum." I have seen comments like this posted to news stories about CC. It sounds good; seamless transitions for children's education no matter where their parents move, no trying to figure out what class to put them in, no having to "catch up" to a more advanced curriculum. I did my share of moving from one school to another as a kid. I went to a regular public elementary school in California until the 3rd grade. For 4-5th grades, my sister and I went to a small private school run by a retired teacher. I was back in public school for 6-8th grades, and then we moved from California to Michigan, where I graduated from high school. They were all big transitions for a kid, but the biggest for me was the move from a private school back into a public middle school. I had enough education to be put into the 8th grade, rather than the 6th, but my parents wanted me to be with my age group. So I was very bored with public schooling until I decided to teach myself. I wasn't considered "gifted", so those programs were out. I guess I was just "over qualified". I coasted through high school, practically living in the library. I read everything I could get my hands on, took tests when I had to, graduated with a B average, and went on with my life.
Transitions are never easy, but looking back on the experience, it wasn't the moves themselves that caused problems, nor was it the disconnect between what I already knew and where my classmates were. The problem was that I wasn't aware that I had any control over the different expectations for success in each school, different cultures, and different teaching philosophies. The private school (which was not an "elite" place in any form; Mrs. Covey's idea for uniforms was everyone in blue jeans, a white shirt and a navy blue sweater) was heavily invested in all their students learning all the material and being successful thinkers, with a narrow but very deep curriculum. The public schools were more broad in their outlook, with an emphasis on covering much material rather shallowly. I learned in both, but preferred the Covey method; it was the deep studying I had done that made it possible to for me to succeed. I don't see CC improving on any of that. What I do see is a poorly-thought-out curriculum that was never tested in a real school district, using untested pedagogical methods, and an insistence on a Rube Goldberg-style vague and complicated decoding of the simplest concepts and exercises.
But a much bigger problem I see looming on the horizon is similar to what I call the Monsanto model of agriculture. Over the past 60 years, the genetic diversity of our food crops has been gradually diminishing (another battle for another time). But this lack of diversity leaves us vulnerable to an entire worldwide crop devastation if a super bacterium or other pest burns through a non-resistant cultivar. There is little resilience in uniformity.
Our greatest strength as a people is our diversity, not of race or culture, but of knowledge. The seeds of knowledge children acquire in one area of the country are not the same as what are learned in a different area. When people move from one area to another, they bring their acquired knowledge with them, enriching and expanding the horizons of the people in their new locality. They all learn math, reading, etc. But they learn them with different emphases, with different styles, and with diverse outcomes. There are many proven ways to teach math concepts, writing styles, and reading strategies. Trying to enforce the "one best way" destroys that diversity, and discounts the very real differences between learning styles in children. This is a consideration that I have not seen in any discussion of CC.
What do we lose by having only one curriculum, one way to teach, one "best" of anything? What is lost (or could possibly be gained) by removing time to study great literature, history or the arts in order to study government pamphlets? How can one set of standards possibly cover all the different ways of knowing? Mrs. Covey's way of teaching and emphasis on certain knowledge structures was very different than the structure I encountered in the public schools. The different PS districts also varied in emphasis and style. For example, I learned about the Catholic mission system in California and its influence on the local history by reading, writing and studying. Aside from being a very good beginning to my interest in anthropology and religious thought, it helped me understand other parts of the society I lived in. Are children in California learning that now? Or are they busy reading the latest publication from the EPA on carbon emissions? Any national standard, even a very good one, cannot help but lessen that knowledge base and impoverish the experience of being an American. It weakens each one of us and leaves us, as a nation, with little resilience.
"National standards are good. Children can move from one district to another and have the same curriculum." I have seen comments like this posted to news stories about CC. It sounds good; seamless transitions for children's education no matter where their parents move, no trying to figure out what class to put them in, no having to "catch up" to a more advanced curriculum. I did my share of moving from one school to another as a kid. I went to a regular public elementary school in California until the 3rd grade. For 4-5th grades, my sister and I went to a small private school run by a retired teacher. I was back in public school for 6-8th grades, and then we moved from California to Michigan, where I graduated from high school. They were all big transitions for a kid, but the biggest for me was the move from a private school back into a public middle school. I had enough education to be put into the 8th grade, rather than the 6th, but my parents wanted me to be with my age group. So I was very bored with public schooling until I decided to teach myself. I wasn't considered "gifted", so those programs were out. I guess I was just "over qualified". I coasted through high school, practically living in the library. I read everything I could get my hands on, took tests when I had to, graduated with a B average, and went on with my life.
Transitions are never easy, but looking back on the experience, it wasn't the moves themselves that caused problems, nor was it the disconnect between what I already knew and where my classmates were. The problem was that I wasn't aware that I had any control over the different expectations for success in each school, different cultures, and different teaching philosophies. The private school (which was not an "elite" place in any form; Mrs. Covey's idea for uniforms was everyone in blue jeans, a white shirt and a navy blue sweater) was heavily invested in all their students learning all the material and being successful thinkers, with a narrow but very deep curriculum. The public schools were more broad in their outlook, with an emphasis on covering much material rather shallowly. I learned in both, but preferred the Covey method; it was the deep studying I had done that made it possible to for me to succeed. I don't see CC improving on any of that. What I do see is a poorly-thought-out curriculum that was never tested in a real school district, using untested pedagogical methods, and an insistence on a Rube Goldberg-style vague and complicated decoding of the simplest concepts and exercises.
But a much bigger problem I see looming on the horizon is similar to what I call the Monsanto model of agriculture. Over the past 60 years, the genetic diversity of our food crops has been gradually diminishing (another battle for another time). But this lack of diversity leaves us vulnerable to an entire worldwide crop devastation if a super bacterium or other pest burns through a non-resistant cultivar. There is little resilience in uniformity.
Our greatest strength as a people is our diversity, not of race or culture, but of knowledge. The seeds of knowledge children acquire in one area of the country are not the same as what are learned in a different area. When people move from one area to another, they bring their acquired knowledge with them, enriching and expanding the horizons of the people in their new locality. They all learn math, reading, etc. But they learn them with different emphases, with different styles, and with diverse outcomes. There are many proven ways to teach math concepts, writing styles, and reading strategies. Trying to enforce the "one best way" destroys that diversity, and discounts the very real differences between learning styles in children. This is a consideration that I have not seen in any discussion of CC.
What do we lose by having only one curriculum, one way to teach, one "best" of anything? What is lost (or could possibly be gained) by removing time to study great literature, history or the arts in order to study government pamphlets? How can one set of standards possibly cover all the different ways of knowing? Mrs. Covey's way of teaching and emphasis on certain knowledge structures was very different than the structure I encountered in the public schools. The different PS districts also varied in emphasis and style. For example, I learned about the Catholic mission system in California and its influence on the local history by reading, writing and studying. Aside from being a very good beginning to my interest in anthropology and religious thought, it helped me understand other parts of the society I lived in. Are children in California learning that now? Or are they busy reading the latest publication from the EPA on carbon emissions? Any national standard, even a very good one, cannot help but lessen that knowledge base and impoverish the experience of being an American. It weakens each one of us and leaves us, as a nation, with little resilience.
Saturday, July 14, 2012
Our Darkest Hour
This has been an upsetting 3 1/2 years, politically and economically. Passions on both sides of the political spectrum have been inflamed, and the focus of the storm raging about us is the current President of the United States, Barak Hussein Obama. In my 60 years of life in these United States, I can't think of a time when we have been more divided, more polarized, more fearful, or more unsettled as a nation.
There are many theories as to why this is so. Lack of faith in God, a lessening of brotherly love, deception and lawlessness in high places, laziness on the part of the people, an influx of uninvited people across our borders, are all given as reasons for the general malaise that has afflicted us collectively. Our President has been charged by some as the source of all these problems, the main motivator of the evils we see, but feel helpless to minimize. Others have hailed his actions as masterful strokes. He has been accused by the conservative members of society of being crazy, psychotic, manipulating, a Communist, a Socialist, and many other names unsavory, and for the most part, inaccurate. The liberal side of the spectrum has hailed him as a savior, a great statesman, a genius, a person who is the last, best hope for our country.
I would put out the hypothesis that he is none of these things. I think both sides have missed seeing Obama for what he is, because his motivations and central thinking are so far removed from an American point of view that we have all mistaken what he is for what we individually think he is, or what we want him to be.
The American POV is one of exceptionalism, of faith that our country, our way of life, our political system, our very being, is a force for good in the world. Americans truly believe that we are the "city set upon the hill", the grand experiment in freedom and faith that will free the world from the chains of the past. We do not look upon ourselves as aggressors, but defenders. We do not try to conquer, but to comfort. We are the most generous people on the face of the earth, by any reasonable measure. This POV has been developed and strengthened by over 200 years of history. We are not perfect; we have made some very serious mistakes. But we have tried to learn from those mistakes, tried to make amends when possible, and turn former enemies into friends. That, I believe, is part of who we are; a people who want to help, want to uplift and strengthen our neighbors, and want to protect the helpless and downtrodden. This worldview of ours is strong, and, for the most part, correct. We have done what we could, and what we can do is expanded by our unfailing optimism in ourselves and our God, however we picture deity.
But there are many in the world who do not hold our worldview, who resent our "colonial" aspirations, who have no part of our view of ourselves as good and exceptional. Most of the developing world was subjected to European colonialism at one point or another, which colored their views and expectations of Europeans, and by extension, Americans. There are many in Africa and Asia who resent and despise the Western model of conquest and domination, and include America in their resentment, even though we, as a country, are a result of European colonialism.
It is not my purpose, nor my intent, to judge the feelings of those people who resent us, even if I feel their resentment is misplaced. My job is to live my life according to the principles I hold: that we are all brothers and sisters, children of a Heavenly Father who loves us equally and impartially.
Barak Obama grew up in a fractured household, abandoned by his father, his mother, and his stepfather. He spent most of his formative years in Indonesia and in Hawaii, living with people who were not believers in the American model of republican democratic principles. He grew up hearing how colonialism destroyed his people, how Western governments were evil and dominating, and how there were only a few fit to govern, the elite of the underdogs. He absorbed aspects of communism, socialism, fascism, and a collective mindset, but he does not completely fit into any of these categories. He has been termed an "enigma" by those who have tried to tease apart his actions and words. But there is a paradigm that fits better than the rest, a worldview that explains much more why he has done the things he has.
Dinesh D'Souza wrote a book, which has been made into a movie, called "2016: Obama's America". In an interview on 7-12-2012 with Glenn Beck, Mr. D'Souza talked about what he found while researching and filming Obama's past. He found that Obama's heritage and upbringing were anti-colonial, and that he blames the developing world's problems on their colonial past and present. Obama wants to bring the 3rd world up by bringing America and Western civilization down. It's not just socialism, but the annihilation of republicanism, not just advancing the less advantaged, but pulling down and contracting the advantaged. His moves to prevent energy independence, to leave our borders open, to give a free pass to illegal immigrants, to make fawning overtures to despots and tyrants, are all designed to make America weak, small, and unable to be a superpower. He doesn't want any superpowers, preferring the idea of "equal" peers, all nations having the same power. He will leave us without the means to defend ourselves, to feed ourselves, to power our civilization, so that we will become like "everybody else".
His mindset is so different from the run-of-the-mill American's that both sides of the aisle have been floundering to define Obama, to put him in a box. But none of the boxes so far have fit well; there are parts of communism, socialism, etc., but he doesn't fit any of the boxes Americans are used to dealing with. Our colonial past was over and done with in 1787, with the Constitution. We forged a new nation, beholden to no one, exploited by no one, able to make her own way on the global stage. No other country has managed to do what America has. And that is why, in Obama's mind, no country needs more to be brought down, humbled and squeezed smaller than America.
This is truly our darkest hour. We are gambling on our very lives, our standard of living, our exceptionalism, our fortunes and our sacred honor, with the dice being cast in about 4 months.
There are many theories as to why this is so. Lack of faith in God, a lessening of brotherly love, deception and lawlessness in high places, laziness on the part of the people, an influx of uninvited people across our borders, are all given as reasons for the general malaise that has afflicted us collectively. Our President has been charged by some as the source of all these problems, the main motivator of the evils we see, but feel helpless to minimize. Others have hailed his actions as masterful strokes. He has been accused by the conservative members of society of being crazy, psychotic, manipulating, a Communist, a Socialist, and many other names unsavory, and for the most part, inaccurate. The liberal side of the spectrum has hailed him as a savior, a great statesman, a genius, a person who is the last, best hope for our country.
I would put out the hypothesis that he is none of these things. I think both sides have missed seeing Obama for what he is, because his motivations and central thinking are so far removed from an American point of view that we have all mistaken what he is for what we individually think he is, or what we want him to be.
The American POV is one of exceptionalism, of faith that our country, our way of life, our political system, our very being, is a force for good in the world. Americans truly believe that we are the "city set upon the hill", the grand experiment in freedom and faith that will free the world from the chains of the past. We do not look upon ourselves as aggressors, but defenders. We do not try to conquer, but to comfort. We are the most generous people on the face of the earth, by any reasonable measure. This POV has been developed and strengthened by over 200 years of history. We are not perfect; we have made some very serious mistakes. But we have tried to learn from those mistakes, tried to make amends when possible, and turn former enemies into friends. That, I believe, is part of who we are; a people who want to help, want to uplift and strengthen our neighbors, and want to protect the helpless and downtrodden. This worldview of ours is strong, and, for the most part, correct. We have done what we could, and what we can do is expanded by our unfailing optimism in ourselves and our God, however we picture deity.
But there are many in the world who do not hold our worldview, who resent our "colonial" aspirations, who have no part of our view of ourselves as good and exceptional. Most of the developing world was subjected to European colonialism at one point or another, which colored their views and expectations of Europeans, and by extension, Americans. There are many in Africa and Asia who resent and despise the Western model of conquest and domination, and include America in their resentment, even though we, as a country, are a result of European colonialism.
It is not my purpose, nor my intent, to judge the feelings of those people who resent us, even if I feel their resentment is misplaced. My job is to live my life according to the principles I hold: that we are all brothers and sisters, children of a Heavenly Father who loves us equally and impartially.
Barak Obama grew up in a fractured household, abandoned by his father, his mother, and his stepfather. He spent most of his formative years in Indonesia and in Hawaii, living with people who were not believers in the American model of republican democratic principles. He grew up hearing how colonialism destroyed his people, how Western governments were evil and dominating, and how there were only a few fit to govern, the elite of the underdogs. He absorbed aspects of communism, socialism, fascism, and a collective mindset, but he does not completely fit into any of these categories. He has been termed an "enigma" by those who have tried to tease apart his actions and words. But there is a paradigm that fits better than the rest, a worldview that explains much more why he has done the things he has.
Dinesh D'Souza wrote a book, which has been made into a movie, called "2016: Obama's America". In an interview on 7-12-2012 with Glenn Beck, Mr. D'Souza talked about what he found while researching and filming Obama's past. He found that Obama's heritage and upbringing were anti-colonial, and that he blames the developing world's problems on their colonial past and present. Obama wants to bring the 3rd world up by bringing America and Western civilization down. It's not just socialism, but the annihilation of republicanism, not just advancing the less advantaged, but pulling down and contracting the advantaged. His moves to prevent energy independence, to leave our borders open, to give a free pass to illegal immigrants, to make fawning overtures to despots and tyrants, are all designed to make America weak, small, and unable to be a superpower. He doesn't want any superpowers, preferring the idea of "equal" peers, all nations having the same power. He will leave us without the means to defend ourselves, to feed ourselves, to power our civilization, so that we will become like "everybody else".
His mindset is so different from the run-of-the-mill American's that both sides of the aisle have been floundering to define Obama, to put him in a box. But none of the boxes so far have fit well; there are parts of communism, socialism, etc., but he doesn't fit any of the boxes Americans are used to dealing with. Our colonial past was over and done with in 1787, with the Constitution. We forged a new nation, beholden to no one, exploited by no one, able to make her own way on the global stage. No other country has managed to do what America has. And that is why, in Obama's mind, no country needs more to be brought down, humbled and squeezed smaller than America.
This is truly our darkest hour. We are gambling on our very lives, our standard of living, our exceptionalism, our fortunes and our sacred honor, with the dice being cast in about 4 months.
Thursday, November 24, 2011
Gratitude
Today is Nov 24, 2011, the national holiday of Thanksgiving to those of us lucky enough to live in the United States of America.
I awoke this morning, as I do most mornings, with a hymn soaring through my mind. "On This Day of Joy and Gladness" (Hymns of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, no. 64.) The first verse reads, in part,
On this day of joy and gladness,
Lord, we praise thy holy name;
In this sacred place of worship,
We thy glories loud proclaim!
Today is truly a day of joy for me as I go over in my mind the many things I have to be grateful for. But the mention of being in a sacred place of worship was a bit puzzling at first. A quick search at LDS.org brought up this quote:
“Temple. One other word is equal in importance to a Latter-day Saint. Home. Put the words holy temple and home together, and you have described the house of the Lord!” (Boyd K. Packer, “The Shield of Faith,” Ensign, May 1995, 8.)
I have been gently urged for the past few months to work at making my home a reflection of the holy temple, a place of peace and order where the Spirit and my family and friends will feel welcome. But I hadn't really thought of our home as an important place of worship before. But my home is where I spend the majority of my waking hours, the place where I have the most influence in the world. It is also the place of greatest gratitude. Most of my worship consists of expressing gratitude for the incredible blessings I have received throughout my life.
I am grateful for my health, for the wondrous ability I have to see and hear the beauties of this world, the health I enjoy that enables me to move, to work and to serve others.
I am grateful for my husband, for his love and concern for my well being. As we near the end of our walk together on the earth, I am grateful for the opportunities I have to serve and care for him. I am also grateful for the knowledge that we can continue our walk together in the future as husband and wife, sealed together for eternity.
I am grateful for our children and grandchildren, who have taught me patience and the importance of unconditional love. Our family consists of people who have struggles and challenges that make them stretch and grow, who don't always know or remember how much they are loved, but who are all on the path, one way or another, back to our Heavenly Father. Raising our children has been my greatest challenge and deepest joy, and in some ways, my deepest sorrow. And that's how it should be, because it's through our family associations that we learn the heights and depths of our own souls. There is nothing in this world more important than the family unit.
I awoke this morning, as I do most mornings, with a hymn soaring through my mind. "On This Day of Joy and Gladness" (Hymns of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, no. 64.) The first verse reads, in part,
On this day of joy and gladness,
Lord, we praise thy holy name;
In this sacred place of worship,
We thy glories loud proclaim!
Today is truly a day of joy for me as I go over in my mind the many things I have to be grateful for. But the mention of being in a sacred place of worship was a bit puzzling at first. A quick search at LDS.org brought up this quote:
“Temple. One other word is equal in importance to a Latter-day Saint. Home. Put the words holy temple and home together, and you have described the house of the Lord!” (Boyd K. Packer, “The Shield of Faith,” Ensign, May 1995, 8.)
I have been gently urged for the past few months to work at making my home a reflection of the holy temple, a place of peace and order where the Spirit and my family and friends will feel welcome. But I hadn't really thought of our home as an important place of worship before. But my home is where I spend the majority of my waking hours, the place where I have the most influence in the world. It is also the place of greatest gratitude. Most of my worship consists of expressing gratitude for the incredible blessings I have received throughout my life.
I am grateful for my health, for the wondrous ability I have to see and hear the beauties of this world, the health I enjoy that enables me to move, to work and to serve others.
I am grateful for my husband, for his love and concern for my well being. As we near the end of our walk together on the earth, I am grateful for the opportunities I have to serve and care for him. I am also grateful for the knowledge that we can continue our walk together in the future as husband and wife, sealed together for eternity.
I am grateful for our children and grandchildren, who have taught me patience and the importance of unconditional love. Our family consists of people who have struggles and challenges that make them stretch and grow, who don't always know or remember how much they are loved, but who are all on the path, one way or another, back to our Heavenly Father. Raising our children has been my greatest challenge and deepest joy, and in some ways, my deepest sorrow. And that's how it should be, because it's through our family associations that we learn the heights and depths of our own souls. There is nothing in this world more important than the family unit.
I am grateful for my parents and grandparents. They gave me my first lessons in love, gave me the chance to come to this earth and start my mortal journey, and continue to bless my life. They are my guiding lights.
I am grateful for my friends, who have given me shining examples of how to be the person I long to be. They give me opportunities to serve, help me back up when I fall, and strengthen me when I am weak. C.S Lewis said "Friendship is...the sort of love one can imagine between angels." I have been blessed to be in the company of angels throughout my life.
I am grateful to live in this country. I believe the USA was produced through divine intervention, that this is a blessed land for a righteous people. In spite of our shortcomings as a nation, no other place on earth can equal it. We are going through dangerous times now, as we have in the past, but the collective faith of her people will still call down blessings from heaven. We have the greatest freedoms ever accorded a people in the history of the world, which brings upon us the greatest responsibility to guard and share those freedoms with the rest of the human family.
I am grateful most of all for my God, for His love and care for me and my world. This is truly a day of joy and gladness for me as I think about my Savior, His wonderful gift of the Atonement, and His promise of eternal life with my family and friends.
We all have much to be thankful for today. May we all spend some time in reflection on how richly we have been blessed.
I am grateful for my friends, who have given me shining examples of how to be the person I long to be. They give me opportunities to serve, help me back up when I fall, and strengthen me when I am weak. C.S Lewis said "Friendship is...the sort of love one can imagine between angels." I have been blessed to be in the company of angels throughout my life.
I am grateful to live in this country. I believe the USA was produced through divine intervention, that this is a blessed land for a righteous people. In spite of our shortcomings as a nation, no other place on earth can equal it. We are going through dangerous times now, as we have in the past, but the collective faith of her people will still call down blessings from heaven. We have the greatest freedoms ever accorded a people in the history of the world, which brings upon us the greatest responsibility to guard and share those freedoms with the rest of the human family.
I am grateful most of all for my God, for His love and care for me and my world. This is truly a day of joy and gladness for me as I think about my Savior, His wonderful gift of the Atonement, and His promise of eternal life with my family and friends.
We all have much to be thankful for today. May we all spend some time in reflection on how richly we have been blessed.
Saturday, July 10, 2010
America's Best
http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pjtv.com%2F%3Fcmd%3Dmpg%26mpid%3D105%26load%3D3848&h=a9c20EN_Q5amvfSuv3QV1YBwecA.
This link goes to one of the best stories I've heard from Detroit in a long time. Two elderly gentlemen, on their own, without government help or interference, are doing the unthinkable. They are taking care of their neighborhoods, mowing vacant city lots, planting gardens, improving the looks of their surroundings. They do this because they care--about themselves, their neighborhood, and their community.
When I talked to my husband about what they were doing, and why, he immediately linked what I had said to the scripture we had read together last night (Alma 60-62). In these chapters, "king-men" have taken over the government, driven the chief judge into exile, and withheld desperately needed men and provisions from the armies fighting to defend the borders of the land from their enemies. These traitors have even sent a letter to the enemy, asking to be left rulers over the land once it's conquered. This is very bad, when citizens turn traitor to their own country. But that's what's happening to us now. Our "king-men" are trying to set up a government that is not run by the people, but is running the people. They are very persuasive, telling us that the government will take care of everything: everyone will be fed, everyone will have healthcare, the government can do all this if everyone gets on board with the program.
The number and scope of the recent laws that have been passed in Washington threaten to destroy our economy, while making everybody a ward of the state. We as a country are so far in debt, there is doubt among economists as to whether or not we can ever dig ourselves out. I don't want kings, or socialists, or liberals running the country, or me. We can be responsible for our own lives, and our communities, but it takes work. Hard work, like Mr. King and Mr. Edwards are doing, that isn't "helped" along by the government. People who know how to labor and have self-control don't need a big government, just one that will protect them from the lazy and opportunistic.
This link goes to one of the best stories I've heard from Detroit in a long time. Two elderly gentlemen, on their own, without government help or interference, are doing the unthinkable. They are taking care of their neighborhoods, mowing vacant city lots, planting gardens, improving the looks of their surroundings. They do this because they care--about themselves, their neighborhood, and their community.
When I talked to my husband about what they were doing, and why, he immediately linked what I had said to the scripture we had read together last night (Alma 60-62). In these chapters, "king-men" have taken over the government, driven the chief judge into exile, and withheld desperately needed men and provisions from the armies fighting to defend the borders of the land from their enemies. These traitors have even sent a letter to the enemy, asking to be left rulers over the land once it's conquered. This is very bad, when citizens turn traitor to their own country. But that's what's happening to us now. Our "king-men" are trying to set up a government that is not run by the people, but is running the people. They are very persuasive, telling us that the government will take care of everything: everyone will be fed, everyone will have healthcare, the government can do all this if everyone gets on board with the program.
The number and scope of the recent laws that have been passed in Washington threaten to destroy our economy, while making everybody a ward of the state. We as a country are so far in debt, there is doubt among economists as to whether or not we can ever dig ourselves out. I don't want kings, or socialists, or liberals running the country, or me. We can be responsible for our own lives, and our communities, but it takes work. Hard work, like Mr. King and Mr. Edwards are doing, that isn't "helped" along by the government. People who know how to labor and have self-control don't need a big government, just one that will protect them from the lazy and opportunistic.
Monday, July 5, 2010
What is Joy, and Why Do We Need It?
First off, I'd like to make a distinction. Joy, as I am using the term in this work, is not happiness. Neither is it peace, contentment or “fun”, although it may encompass all these pleasantries. A family dynamics expert, H. Wallace Goddard said:
Joy is inextricably linked to godliness, and is the end result of a life lived in accordance with God's law. But why isn't it happiness or those other things that make life wonderful and satisfying? It's because mere satisfaction won't accomplish God's work.
When a young man or woman feels the first rush of love, the intensity of those feelings can be overwhelming. But it's based on hormones, a chemical reaction in the brain that helps men and women bond as a couple. It's basically selfish; “I want” this other person for myself. That isn't a bad thing at all, as the pair need to be focused on their feelings and needs at the beginning of the relationship, in order to have the bond necessary to make it through the stresses and problems that are inherent in a deeply committed relationship. But it isn't joy.
I think the family is one of the most important places to learn about joy. A person recently posted a question on a blog I frequent. The thread was talking about virtues and how important they are to a healthy society. Sacrifice was mentioned several times. He asked “What's so important about sacrifice?” I posted a reply that essentially said that being willing to sacrifice makes all the other virtues possible. Unless we are willing to put aside our wants for another's needs, the virtues of love, honesty, thrift and industry cannot survive. I pointed out that mothers are a wonderful example of sacrifice. Every single woman who has ever borne a child has made the ultimate sacrifice; she has literally walked through the valley of death in order to bring that child into the world. And the joy that comes of that sacrifice is very close to godliness. Her whole focus is on this new little life, caring for the fruit of her labors, bringing up the next generation. I don't believe that there can be joy without sacrifice. The ultimate sacrifice, of course, was Christ's, the great and atoning sacrifice that He made for all of us.
The various successes we attain in this life are another form of happiness—the elation at winning a coveted prize, the surprise at receiving an unexpected windfall, the feeling of accomplishment at completing a difficult task—these are all good feelings and worth experiencing. But they are also centered around “me”, I did this or that, I got something I didn't have before. They are not joy, nor do they lead to joy.
Joy is always “other” centered. It is never focused on self, on what the self can attain, but is all about those around us. Joy produces love of and desires for the joy of others. It entails sacrifice so that others will have what we have. Do a couple in love have the same feelings of commitment and love for other people? Does the winner of the race want the other contestants to be winners also? If you won the lottery, would you want everybody else to have won what you did?
The things that bring us pleasure in this world are of this world, and are gone when we leave it. We don't take lottery winnings with us when we die, nor do we get to keep the other “toys” we acquire during our sojourn here. We need joy because it is one of the few things we take with us into the next life, and the only thing that can bring us into the presence of Deity. The scriptures tell us that “Adam fell that man might be, and man is that he might have joy (2 Nephi 2:25).” We are not guaranteed joy, because we are always free to choose something else. If all we want is happiness, we can have that. But it will prove to be most unsatisfying in the end.
Goddard mentions “God's design”. In the Pearl of Great Price we read, “For this is my work and my glory, to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man (Moses 1:39).” He wants us to come back to Him, to live with Him eternally. Joy is what He feels; the joy of knowing that His children are becoming like Him, ready to receive everything He has. His whole purpose is focused on us. When our focus is on the salvation and eternal life of those around us, we are becoming like Him. When our focus broadens out to where it rests on the Savior, then we can speak of having a “fulness of joy. “...for in this world your joy is not full, but in me your joy is full (D&C 101:36).” Don't “be happy”, be joyful!
“Joy is different from pleasure or amusement. Getting to joy often entails sustained effort. Joy is the evidence that our gifts have intersected with God’s design. We are doing the thing for which we were designed. God tells us to “fill the measure of our creation and have joy therein.” This is a key principle of life design.” (Meridian Magazine online, downloaded 7-5-2010, http://www.ldsmag.com/myth/090924marriageprint.html)
Joy is inextricably linked to godliness, and is the end result of a life lived in accordance with God's law. But why isn't it happiness or those other things that make life wonderful and satisfying? It's because mere satisfaction won't accomplish God's work.
When a young man or woman feels the first rush of love, the intensity of those feelings can be overwhelming. But it's based on hormones, a chemical reaction in the brain that helps men and women bond as a couple. It's basically selfish; “I want” this other person for myself. That isn't a bad thing at all, as the pair need to be focused on their feelings and needs at the beginning of the relationship, in order to have the bond necessary to make it through the stresses and problems that are inherent in a deeply committed relationship. But it isn't joy.
I think the family is one of the most important places to learn about joy. A person recently posted a question on a blog I frequent. The thread was talking about virtues and how important they are to a healthy society. Sacrifice was mentioned several times. He asked “What's so important about sacrifice?” I posted a reply that essentially said that being willing to sacrifice makes all the other virtues possible. Unless we are willing to put aside our wants for another's needs, the virtues of love, honesty, thrift and industry cannot survive. I pointed out that mothers are a wonderful example of sacrifice. Every single woman who has ever borne a child has made the ultimate sacrifice; she has literally walked through the valley of death in order to bring that child into the world. And the joy that comes of that sacrifice is very close to godliness. Her whole focus is on this new little life, caring for the fruit of her labors, bringing up the next generation. I don't believe that there can be joy without sacrifice. The ultimate sacrifice, of course, was Christ's, the great and atoning sacrifice that He made for all of us.
The various successes we attain in this life are another form of happiness—the elation at winning a coveted prize, the surprise at receiving an unexpected windfall, the feeling of accomplishment at completing a difficult task—these are all good feelings and worth experiencing. But they are also centered around “me”, I did this or that, I got something I didn't have before. They are not joy, nor do they lead to joy.
Joy is always “other” centered. It is never focused on self, on what the self can attain, but is all about those around us. Joy produces love of and desires for the joy of others. It entails sacrifice so that others will have what we have. Do a couple in love have the same feelings of commitment and love for other people? Does the winner of the race want the other contestants to be winners also? If you won the lottery, would you want everybody else to have won what you did?
The things that bring us pleasure in this world are of this world, and are gone when we leave it. We don't take lottery winnings with us when we die, nor do we get to keep the other “toys” we acquire during our sojourn here. We need joy because it is one of the few things we take with us into the next life, and the only thing that can bring us into the presence of Deity. The scriptures tell us that “Adam fell that man might be, and man is that he might have joy (2 Nephi 2:25).” We are not guaranteed joy, because we are always free to choose something else. If all we want is happiness, we can have that. But it will prove to be most unsatisfying in the end.
Goddard mentions “God's design”. In the Pearl of Great Price we read, “For this is my work and my glory, to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man (Moses 1:39).” He wants us to come back to Him, to live with Him eternally. Joy is what He feels; the joy of knowing that His children are becoming like Him, ready to receive everything He has. His whole purpose is focused on us. When our focus is on the salvation and eternal life of those around us, we are becoming like Him. When our focus broadens out to where it rests on the Savior, then we can speak of having a “fulness of joy. “...for in this world your joy is not full, but in me your joy is full (D&C 101:36).” Don't “be happy”, be joyful!
Thursday, June 17, 2010
People and Paring Knives
In the old radio show “Fibber McGee and Molly”, Fibber tended to fly off the handle without having a clear understanding of the particulars of the situation. At the end of one episode, his long-suffering wife, Molly, remarks, “You know, dearie, people and paring knives that lose their temper are pretty dull to have around.”
The word “temper” has more than one meaning, and I found several interesting definitions on the Web:
*anneal: bring to a desired consistency, texture, or hardness by a process of gradually heating and cooling; "temper glass"
*harden by reheating and cooling in oil; "temper steel"
*pique: a sudden outburst of anger; "his temper sparked like damp firewood"
*adjust the pitch (of pianos)
*a characteristic (habitual or relatively temporary) state of feeling; "whether he praised or cursed me depended on his temper at the time"; "he was in a bad humor"
*make more temperate, acceptable, or suitable by adding something else; moderate; "she tempered her criticism"
*a disposition to exhibit uncontrolled anger; "his temper was well known to all his employees"
*chasten: restrain
*the elasticity and hardness of a metal object; its ability to absorb considerable energy before cracking
(wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn)
The definitions relating to metal and glass refer to processes that make these materials more useful, by making them stronger and less subject to breakage. There was a type of tempered steel sword, made in Toledo, Spain during the Renaissance, that could be bent almost double without breaking. Tempered glass is much stronger than regular rolled glass, and when it does break, it falls into many small, round pieces that are not as hazardous as the long, sharp shards of regular broken glass.
People can be tempered as well. The challenges we face in our daily lives can strengthen us, and the process of meeting, overcoming, and then moving past challenges helps us to deal with the next stressor. This process of “heating” and “cooling” is necessary for us to mature. The first time steel is heated, it becomes brittle, and needs the process of gradual heating and cooling, over and over, in order to produce a good temper. But a rapid, high and prolonged heating will destroy the temper it had received, and will leave the steel weaker than it was before the tempering process was begun. People react much like steel to the tempering process. When we “blow our top” and “lose our temper”, it makes us weaker, less able to deal with stress, and makes it harder to regain our equilibrium. A person becomes brittle, easily broken, and liable to fly into anger at the least provocation, or at no real provocation at all. It is only by controlling how we react to the unexpected around us that we learn to “keep our temper”.
The word “temper” has more than one meaning, and I found several interesting definitions on the Web:
*anneal: bring to a desired consistency, texture, or hardness by a process of gradually heating and cooling; "temper glass"
*harden by reheating and cooling in oil; "temper steel"
*pique: a sudden outburst of anger; "his temper sparked like damp firewood"
*adjust the pitch (of pianos)
*a characteristic (habitual or relatively temporary) state of feeling; "whether he praised or cursed me depended on his temper at the time"; "he was in a bad humor"
*make more temperate, acceptable, or suitable by adding something else; moderate; "she tempered her criticism"
*a disposition to exhibit uncontrolled anger; "his temper was well known to all his employees"
*chasten: restrain
*the elasticity and hardness of a metal object; its ability to absorb considerable energy before cracking
(wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn)
The definitions relating to metal and glass refer to processes that make these materials more useful, by making them stronger and less subject to breakage. There was a type of tempered steel sword, made in Toledo, Spain during the Renaissance, that could be bent almost double without breaking. Tempered glass is much stronger than regular rolled glass, and when it does break, it falls into many small, round pieces that are not as hazardous as the long, sharp shards of regular broken glass.
People can be tempered as well. The challenges we face in our daily lives can strengthen us, and the process of meeting, overcoming, and then moving past challenges helps us to deal with the next stressor. This process of “heating” and “cooling” is necessary for us to mature. The first time steel is heated, it becomes brittle, and needs the process of gradual heating and cooling, over and over, in order to produce a good temper. But a rapid, high and prolonged heating will destroy the temper it had received, and will leave the steel weaker than it was before the tempering process was begun. People react much like steel to the tempering process. When we “blow our top” and “lose our temper”, it makes us weaker, less able to deal with stress, and makes it harder to regain our equilibrium. A person becomes brittle, easily broken, and liable to fly into anger at the least provocation, or at no real provocation at all. It is only by controlling how we react to the unexpected around us that we learn to “keep our temper”.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)