As I sit hear and listen to 'No Line On The Horizon' I just had to pay my regards to Bono and the boys. Well Done! Another great album.
I don't know how they continue to blow everyone else out of the water. This album and 'How To Dismantle An Atomic Bomb' are just phenomenal. Both albums I did not like at first but after you really listen to the albums they grow on you and you start to realize just how talented these guys really are. Tell me what other 80's band is still producing top selling albums that continue to rock and win awards without being crude or over the top. The step from 'The Joshua Tree' and 'Rattle Hum' to 'Achtung Baby' pretty much told me and everyone else that was this band was here to stay. Other such bands like INXS could just not make the jump from the 80's to the 90's.
Friday, August 28, 2009
Saturday, August 22, 2009
Mother Teresa
One morning while I was up at 5 AM with Claire I turned on the TV. It was Elder Faust giving a devotional. One of the best I have heard. He spoke of Mother Teresa's thoughts concerning abortion.
Here is a snippet of his talk.
"Abortion is one evil practice that has become socially accepted in our country and, indeed, in the world. Many of today's politicians claim not to favor abortion, but oppose government intervention in a woman's right to choose an abortion.
During a national prayer breakfast in Washington on February third of this year, Mother Teresa gave the most honest and powerful proclamation of truth on this subject I have ever heard. She is the eighty-three-year-old Yugoslavian nun who has cared for the poorest of the poor in India for years. She is now aged and physically frail, but courageous, with immense spiritual strength. Mother Teresa delivered a message that cut to the very heart and soul of the social ills afflicting America, which traditionally has given generously to the peoples of the earth but now has become selfish. She stated that the greatest proof of that selfishness is abortion. Cal Thomas of the Los Angeles Times Syndicate reported on her speech. He said that Mother Teresa had tied abortion to growing violence and murder in the streets by saying,
If we accept that a mother can kill even her own child, how can we tell other people not to kill each other? . . . Any country that accepts abortion is not teaching its people to love, but to use any violence to get what they want.["Mother Teresa Has Anti-Abortion Answer," Salt Lake Tribune, February 15, 1994, p. A11]
Then she alluded to the concern that has been shown for orphan children in India and elsewhere in the world, for which she expressed gratitude. But she continued,
These concerns are very good. But often these same people are not concerned with the millions who are being killed by the deliberate decision of their own mothers. And this is what is the greatest destroyer of peace today--abortion, which brings people to such blindness. [Ibid.]
Cal Thomas, commenting on this powerful message, said:
Why should people or nations regard human life as noble or dignified if abortion flourishes? Why agonize about indiscriminate death in Bosnia when babies are being killed far more efficiently and out of the sight of television cameras? [Ibid.]
In conclusion, Mother Teresa pled for pregnant women who don't want their children to give them to her. She said, "I am willing to accept any child who would be aborted and to give that child to a married couple who will love the child and be loved by the child" (ibid.). What consummate spiritual courage this remarkable old woman demonstrated. How the devil must have been offended! Her remarkable declaration, however, was not generally picked up by the press or the editorial writers. Perhaps they felt more comfortable being politically or socially correct. After all, they can justify their stance by asserting that everyone does it, or it is legal. Fortunately the scriptures and the message of the prophets cannot be so revised".
What made the talk even more powerful was that fact that I was listening while holding my brand new baby girl.
Here is a snippet of his talk.
"Abortion is one evil practice that has become socially accepted in our country and, indeed, in the world. Many of today's politicians claim not to favor abortion, but oppose government intervention in a woman's right to choose an abortion.
During a national prayer breakfast in Washington on February third of this year, Mother Teresa gave the most honest and powerful proclamation of truth on this subject I have ever heard. She is the eighty-three-year-old Yugoslavian nun who has cared for the poorest of the poor in India for years. She is now aged and physically frail, but courageous, with immense spiritual strength. Mother Teresa delivered a message that cut to the very heart and soul of the social ills afflicting America, which traditionally has given generously to the peoples of the earth but now has become selfish. She stated that the greatest proof of that selfishness is abortion. Cal Thomas of the Los Angeles Times Syndicate reported on her speech. He said that Mother Teresa had tied abortion to growing violence and murder in the streets by saying,
If we accept that a mother can kill even her own child, how can we tell other people not to kill each other? . . . Any country that accepts abortion is not teaching its people to love, but to use any violence to get what they want.["Mother Teresa Has Anti-Abortion Answer," Salt Lake Tribune, February 15, 1994, p. A11]
Then she alluded to the concern that has been shown for orphan children in India and elsewhere in the world, for which she expressed gratitude. But she continued,
These concerns are very good. But often these same people are not concerned with the millions who are being killed by the deliberate decision of their own mothers. And this is what is the greatest destroyer of peace today--abortion, which brings people to such blindness. [Ibid.]
Cal Thomas, commenting on this powerful message, said:
Why should people or nations regard human life as noble or dignified if abortion flourishes? Why agonize about indiscriminate death in Bosnia when babies are being killed far more efficiently and out of the sight of television cameras? [Ibid.]
In conclusion, Mother Teresa pled for pregnant women who don't want their children to give them to her. She said, "I am willing to accept any child who would be aborted and to give that child to a married couple who will love the child and be loved by the child" (ibid.). What consummate spiritual courage this remarkable old woman demonstrated. How the devil must have been offended! Her remarkable declaration, however, was not generally picked up by the press or the editorial writers. Perhaps they felt more comfortable being politically or socially correct. After all, they can justify their stance by asserting that everyone does it, or it is legal. Fortunately the scriptures and the message of the prophets cannot be so revised".
What made the talk even more powerful was that fact that I was listening while holding my brand new baby girl.
Saturday, August 15, 2009
Santaquin Peak, Utah County, Utah
Getting ready to set up camp. Good thing neither one of us sleep walk.
Half way up the trail looking back on Fairview Canyon.
This is the high point on the Peak looking down on Utah Valley.
This is the high point looking east.
Mountain goat heard. They left when we arrived but I woke to the clip clop of them hiking on the rock cliffs.
Santaquin Peak elevation 10,685'
My friend Aaron talked me into hiking the Santaquin Peak with him so he could 'spot' for deer. It was an amazing hike that I have never done before. At the corral I always took my bike down the Benny Creek trail and never down the Loafer trail. We went last month in July and started the hike at 3:30 pm when it was 95-degrees. It was way to hot but we made it. It took us 4 hours to get to the saddle where we campled at 10,000' with the mountain goats. It was pristine and beaultiful. I highly recomend the hike.
I did it in my old running shoes, bad idea. I am still nursing blisters and purple toe nail.
Thursday, June 4, 2009
Strange Saturday
One Saturday after a nice morning run I got back to the house and found Luke drawing at the kitchen table. Luke is constantly drawing Pokemon characters battling each other. So I was pumped from a good run and decided to turn on a little Guns-n-Roses to stretch out. So as I was listening to 'Sweet Child of Mine' cranked loud I heard Luke say Dad turn that down I can't concentrate with all that noise. It totally caught me off guard and I stared at him for a minute and then said the only thing that came to my mind "If its too loud then you are too old". So here I am the 35 year old and my 7 year old is telling me to turn down my music. Very strange.
Friday, March 13, 2009
understanding the issues surrounding Gay Marriage
For those of you who might be wondering why I continue to post about Gay Marriage it is because I continue to have conversations with people who can not articulate the issues surrounding gay marriage and make statements such as 'Whats the harm if two people love each other?' or 'Gay marriage is a civil right.' I think this lack of understanding comes from very loud liberal media voices. We are continually attacked by these sound bites that at their core do not make sense but certainly do a good job of blurring the issues.
So what I am trying to do is present logical arguments against Gay Marriage in an effort to level the playing field. I understand that it is a very personal and sensitive issue but it also a very complicated issue with many ramifications. I think it is only one of the many issues that is striking at the core of family and marriage.
So here is another one ......
Gay marriage would have long-term societal impacts
By Carrie A. Moore
Deseret News
PROVO, Utah -- Legalizing same-sex marriage would have significant, long-term societal, fiscal and legal consequences just as smoking and divorce do, even among those who don't personally participate.That's the assessment from Lynn Wardle, a professor of law at Brigham Young University, who encouraged an audience of attorneys at the school's annual Campus Education Week on Thursday to speak out in opposition to same-sex marriage, rather than being silenced by fear.
"Legalizing same-sex marriage or civil unions endangers not only marriage as an institution but will endanger the civil rights" of those who don't approve of it, Wardle said. "It's about the right to express opposition, and those who do so already suffer harassment and hostility."As one of very few law professors who speak publicly against it, Wardle said he's been screamed at during the proceedings of large and respected organizations. "I've been called homophobic by a state senator.""Hate-filled, homophobic, narrow-minded and bigoted -- those are the labels you'll get. Those of you who live in California, put on your armor," he said, referring to an upcoming ballot measure that would strike down a recent Supreme Court ruling there legalizing gay marriage."Those attacks are purely an effort to silence, harass and drive out of the public square those who oppose them," he said."That's the greatest concern I have, the effort to intimidate and silence those who have different views. I've had professors I greatly respect come up to me in dark hallways and tell me they agree with me, but they won't stand up in a meeting and say so. They're afraid of the criticism they'll endure."Changing the core definition of marriage will lead to clashes between those who have religious views about marriage and those who don't. "Those who want to promote conjugal marriage will be targeted," and many already have been, he said.Most people who hear much from same-sex marriage proponents but little from the opposition wonder what the harm is, Wardle said. "It's not like a bone sticking out of a limb or blood spurting out of a wound. ... It will be at least a full generation before all the consequences are known. Like smoking, it will take years and decades to see the result."He likened the consequences to the effect of divorce on children, recalling debates on the subject when he was a law school student. The notion of harm to children "was resoundingly rejected ... everybody said it's tough initially but it will be OK and there will be no lasting effects."Yet, within a decade social scientists began documenting very distinct harm to children, he said. "There is now a large body of irrefutable evidence of the serious, harmful effects for children of divorce that have been documented."While the impact is "temporary for two-thirds, it is lifelong for about one-third," he said. Making same-sex marriage legal "will harm you and your family the same way polygamous marriage to 14-year-olds will harm you. ... It will transform the meaning, expectations and practices of marriage as a social institution and affects everyone who has a stake in marriage."Legalizing such relationships would affect the functioning of the entire legal system, he said, "from taxes to torts, from wills to medical treatment. The laws will change, and we'll reconceptualize our understanding that the union of two men or two women is equally important."In doing so, taxpayers will incur "huge social costs," just as they do now when marriages fail. He cited a recent study by a business professor at the Institute of American Values putting taxpayer cost of marital breakdown and non-marital childbearing at $112 billion per year."That's $70 billion in federal costs, $42 billion in state costs, and it amounts to over $1 trillion per decade. If you think fighting the war in Iraq is expensive, we've been paying those costs in this country for the past 30 years."Estimates show those figures translate into about $4,500 per year, per family, in taxpayer dollars. "If your tax burden is high now, wait until those (same-sex) marriages fall apart and the state has to care for" divorced spouses and children of those broken unions, he said.Traditional marriage "contributes much more to society than any other form of adult intimate relationship," and is the bedrock of "society's cultural infrastructure." It is the "instrument of the most important moral transformation of individuals," who enjoy the "most healthy, satisfying and socially beneficial sexual relations.""Gay sex differs in critical ways," from that between husband and wife, he said, beyond the lack of offspring. "The major transmission method for the AIDS virus is through sex between men in every area of the world other than sub-Saharan Africa."Wardle blasted the California Supreme Court's decision earlier this year legalizing gay marriage as "judicial legislation" that "weakened the most basic institution of society." The ruling was "based on assumptions that same-sex marriage contributes as much to society as traditional marriage," and that notion is "not without consequences. They simply assumed the absence of harm and closed their eyes to contrary evidence. In fact, they refused to even examine it."The ruling was a "bold and bad political act that lacked judicial care and caution, but rather opted to exercise political influence." It was an "act of arrogance seldom matched in American legal history" that virtually "guaranteed litigation will occur in other states."He said the only real solution to continued legal wrangling over how individual states will interpret and adapt to same-sex marriage is amending the U.S. Constitution to define marriage nationwide. While advocates for same-sex marriage have made swift headway in the past 15 years, there has been measurable "push-back," he said."Those of you who are summer soldiers or weekend warriors" in speaking out on public policy, "please re-adjust your thinking. These issues are generational and we'll have to work at it for a generation or two. If we do, our grandchildren will reap the benefits of what we're trying to do."
So what I am trying to do is present logical arguments against Gay Marriage in an effort to level the playing field. I understand that it is a very personal and sensitive issue but it also a very complicated issue with many ramifications. I think it is only one of the many issues that is striking at the core of family and marriage.
So here is another one ......
Gay marriage would have long-term societal impacts
By Carrie A. Moore
Deseret News
PROVO, Utah -- Legalizing same-sex marriage would have significant, long-term societal, fiscal and legal consequences just as smoking and divorce do, even among those who don't personally participate.That's the assessment from Lynn Wardle, a professor of law at Brigham Young University, who encouraged an audience of attorneys at the school's annual Campus Education Week on Thursday to speak out in opposition to same-sex marriage, rather than being silenced by fear.
"Legalizing same-sex marriage or civil unions endangers not only marriage as an institution but will endanger the civil rights" of those who don't approve of it, Wardle said. "It's about the right to express opposition, and those who do so already suffer harassment and hostility."As one of very few law professors who speak publicly against it, Wardle said he's been screamed at during the proceedings of large and respected organizations. "I've been called homophobic by a state senator.""Hate-filled, homophobic, narrow-minded and bigoted -- those are the labels you'll get. Those of you who live in California, put on your armor," he said, referring to an upcoming ballot measure that would strike down a recent Supreme Court ruling there legalizing gay marriage."Those attacks are purely an effort to silence, harass and drive out of the public square those who oppose them," he said."That's the greatest concern I have, the effort to intimidate and silence those who have different views. I've had professors I greatly respect come up to me in dark hallways and tell me they agree with me, but they won't stand up in a meeting and say so. They're afraid of the criticism they'll endure."Changing the core definition of marriage will lead to clashes between those who have religious views about marriage and those who don't. "Those who want to promote conjugal marriage will be targeted," and many already have been, he said.Most people who hear much from same-sex marriage proponents but little from the opposition wonder what the harm is, Wardle said. "It's not like a bone sticking out of a limb or blood spurting out of a wound. ... It will be at least a full generation before all the consequences are known. Like smoking, it will take years and decades to see the result."He likened the consequences to the effect of divorce on children, recalling debates on the subject when he was a law school student. The notion of harm to children "was resoundingly rejected ... everybody said it's tough initially but it will be OK and there will be no lasting effects."Yet, within a decade social scientists began documenting very distinct harm to children, he said. "There is now a large body of irrefutable evidence of the serious, harmful effects for children of divorce that have been documented."While the impact is "temporary for two-thirds, it is lifelong for about one-third," he said. Making same-sex marriage legal "will harm you and your family the same way polygamous marriage to 14-year-olds will harm you. ... It will transform the meaning, expectations and practices of marriage as a social institution and affects everyone who has a stake in marriage."Legalizing such relationships would affect the functioning of the entire legal system, he said, "from taxes to torts, from wills to medical treatment. The laws will change, and we'll reconceptualize our understanding that the union of two men or two women is equally important."In doing so, taxpayers will incur "huge social costs," just as they do now when marriages fail. He cited a recent study by a business professor at the Institute of American Values putting taxpayer cost of marital breakdown and non-marital childbearing at $112 billion per year."That's $70 billion in federal costs, $42 billion in state costs, and it amounts to over $1 trillion per decade. If you think fighting the war in Iraq is expensive, we've been paying those costs in this country for the past 30 years."Estimates show those figures translate into about $4,500 per year, per family, in taxpayer dollars. "If your tax burden is high now, wait until those (same-sex) marriages fall apart and the state has to care for" divorced spouses and children of those broken unions, he said.Traditional marriage "contributes much more to society than any other form of adult intimate relationship," and is the bedrock of "society's cultural infrastructure." It is the "instrument of the most important moral transformation of individuals," who enjoy the "most healthy, satisfying and socially beneficial sexual relations.""Gay sex differs in critical ways," from that between husband and wife, he said, beyond the lack of offspring. "The major transmission method for the AIDS virus is through sex between men in every area of the world other than sub-Saharan Africa."Wardle blasted the California Supreme Court's decision earlier this year legalizing gay marriage as "judicial legislation" that "weakened the most basic institution of society." The ruling was "based on assumptions that same-sex marriage contributes as much to society as traditional marriage," and that notion is "not without consequences. They simply assumed the absence of harm and closed their eyes to contrary evidence. In fact, they refused to even examine it."The ruling was a "bold and bad political act that lacked judicial care and caution, but rather opted to exercise political influence." It was an "act of arrogance seldom matched in American legal history" that virtually "guaranteed litigation will occur in other states."He said the only real solution to continued legal wrangling over how individual states will interpret and adapt to same-sex marriage is amending the U.S. Constitution to define marriage nationwide. While advocates for same-sex marriage have made swift headway in the past 15 years, there has been measurable "push-back," he said."Those of you who are summer soldiers or weekend warriors" in speaking out on public policy, "please re-adjust your thinking. These issues are generational and we'll have to work at it for a generation or two. If we do, our grandchildren will reap the benefits of what we're trying to do."
Friday, January 23, 2009
Wednesday, January 7, 2009
Books
I was just noticing my Goodreads books. I realized I need to update it and I feel like I need to explain that I am still working through the New Testament. One chapter at a time; I am in Romans chapter 16. My mission president always said that Romans was a book that could give you brain damage. There are certainly a lot of concepts that can get confusing.
As far as Mormon Question by Sarah Gordon the book is very academic (not surprising with a subtitle like 'Polygamy and Constitutional conflict in Nineteenth Century America') and I have not returned to it. I got side tracked by the biography of Neal A. Maxwell, which is a great book. I am determined to finish Gordon's book but I am also working on Good to Great by Jim Collins.
The other book that keeps staring at me is the biography of Heber C. Kimball by Orson F. Whitney, which I have had for years and have never read. He always fascinated me as he and Brigham Young were the only apostles of the original Quorum of the Twelve that stayed true to the Prophet Joseph Smith.
As far as Mormon Question by Sarah Gordon the book is very academic (not surprising with a subtitle like 'Polygamy and Constitutional conflict in Nineteenth Century America') and I have not returned to it. I got side tracked by the biography of Neal A. Maxwell, which is a great book. I am determined to finish Gordon's book but I am also working on Good to Great by Jim Collins.
The other book that keeps staring at me is the biography of Heber C. Kimball by Orson F. Whitney, which I have had for years and have never read. He always fascinated me as he and Brigham Young were the only apostles of the original Quorum of the Twelve that stayed true to the Prophet Joseph Smith.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
