So this week came news that Kate Kelly and John Dehlin might be excommunicated from the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Kate's case is being tried, it is said, in the same Virginia stake where Sonia Johnson was excommunicated so many years ago.
It does seem she has taken the church to public task for not giving women the priesthood, and she has taught that women should have the priesthood. Bless her, the same, but it does seem that might be worthy of losing her membership.
My thought on women getting the priesthood? I suppose I do not know all. I realize there were prophetesses in the Old Testament. But I don't know of any women in all history having received the priesthood. God gives the priesthood to men, and gives other things to women. Would God ever change that, and decide to give the priesthood to women? I'm guessing not, but, I repeat, I am no authority and do not know all. It does seem if Kate Kelly and others in the Ordain Women movement want a change, they should appeal to God to make the change, as well as appealing to the church. If you believe the church is God's church, and that He directs it, then wouldn't appealing to God be part of your effort to change things?
John Dehlin? I hope it doesn't come to excommunication for him. I don't know all involved in his case. I had ran across his Mormon Stories website, but had not followed it beyond having known of its existence. I understand it was a site intending to help wavering Mormons remain Mormons. There obviously might be more to the site than just that (or perhaps it is something else Dehlin has done), though, or he wouldn't be in trouble.
Tom Phillips? He has not been part of the news I have seen this week. But, a few months ago, his situation was in the news. He is a former stake president in England who no longer believes in the church. He brought a lawsuit against the church calling the teachings fraudulent, and asking that President Monson come to England to answer the charges. His case was thrown out of court.
Sunday, June 15, 2014
Saturday, June 14, 2014
Help Should be Administered on Basis of Need, not Loudness
Not long after awaking this morning, I thought of last night's blog, and then thought of a friend in need. So poor is he as to not even have a television. I would be sure he lives off disability. At any rate, it hit me with a little bit of force how important it is that we do provide care for people such as him.
I wondered if sometimes, those who raise their hands get more care than those who don't. I wondered if he shies from government assistance. Surely he takes it, for I cannot see how he could survive at all without it. But, I look around and see others who receive more. I think of another friend on disability who once came home with a brand new expensive vehicle. I knew his income was but government aid, yet he had a vehicle I would never be able to afford.
Ohh, we must not short the ones who shy from getting help. Our system needs to be remade, so it is not the handraisers who have the advantage. As it is now, if you are turned down, you can appeal to a judge. Now, if you bring a lawyer to the hearing, your odds of winning the appeal are the best. Thus, the art of raising your hand higher than the next person is taken even to another level. This should not be. Need should be determined on basis of need, not loudness.
I wondered if sometimes, those who raise their hands get more care than those who don't. I wondered if he shies from government assistance. Surely he takes it, for I cannot see how he could survive at all without it. But, I look around and see others who receive more. I think of another friend on disability who once came home with a brand new expensive vehicle. I knew his income was but government aid, yet he had a vehicle I would never be able to afford.
Ohh, we must not short the ones who shy from getting help. Our system needs to be remade, so it is not the handraisers who have the advantage. As it is now, if you are turned down, you can appeal to a judge. Now, if you bring a lawyer to the hearing, your odds of winning the appeal are the best. Thus, the art of raising your hand higher than the next person is taken even to another level. This should not be. Need should be determined on basis of need, not loudness.
Friday, June 13, 2014
How Many Would Qualify for SSI-Disability if Everyone Were to Apply?
We might wonder how many people would be on SSI-Disability if everyone were inclined to try. And, we might ought to wonder.
Now? About 8.8 million. That out of a population of maybe 315 million. And, I believe we have something like 130 million households, or slightly more.
But, what if everyone who could qualify were to apply? It is said that about 20 percent of all U.S. adults have a disability. So, what is that? Supposing we have 230 million adults, that's about 46 million who, on the surface, might qualify for SSI-Disability.
It's more than one in every three households.
I read how one in three SSI-Disability recipients qualifies through mental disorders. Sometimes, I think if we pushed the issue, most of us could claim some kind of mental issue. And, if we speak of physical impairment, all we need is a doctor to sign off on it. Most doctors won't sign off on something none legit, but some will. I hear of a thief who was suppose to be 100 percent disabled in the back who was making a crawl through a tight place (with no harm done) when he was caught.
While we should want to help those who are disabled, we should be wary of the potentials in the SSI-Disability program. A nation not inclined to abuse it will perhaps be fine, but if the people become such that they seek out disability pay when perhaps they shouldn't -- and, yes, we do guess some of that is going on now -- then, to an equalling degree, an honest day's pay for an honest day's work will be lost.
Now? About 8.8 million. That out of a population of maybe 315 million. And, I believe we have something like 130 million households, or slightly more.
But, what if everyone who could qualify were to apply? It is said that about 20 percent of all U.S. adults have a disability. So, what is that? Supposing we have 230 million adults, that's about 46 million who, on the surface, might qualify for SSI-Disability.
It's more than one in every three households.
I read how one in three SSI-Disability recipients qualifies through mental disorders. Sometimes, I think if we pushed the issue, most of us could claim some kind of mental issue. And, if we speak of physical impairment, all we need is a doctor to sign off on it. Most doctors won't sign off on something none legit, but some will. I hear of a thief who was suppose to be 100 percent disabled in the back who was making a crawl through a tight place (with no harm done) when he was caught.
While we should want to help those who are disabled, we should be wary of the potentials in the SSI-Disability program. A nation not inclined to abuse it will perhaps be fine, but if the people become such that they seek out disability pay when perhaps they shouldn't -- and, yes, we do guess some of that is going on now -- then, to an equalling degree, an honest day's pay for an honest day's work will be lost.
Thursday, June 12, 2014
The Gun Becomes Your Enemy When it Becomes Your Best Friend
As I read a story of how a devout Mormon teenager in Oregon took a gun to school and killed a fellow student Tuesday, I thought back to a blog I posted about three weeks ago. The story said Jared Michael Padget had a fascination with guns.
And, I thought of what I had written: "The gun becomes an enemy to society when it becomes its best friend." Had the gun become too much of a friend to Padgett? He loved guns. I do not know what brought him to do what he did, but I do wonder if his love of guns was part of it. For all the good we see in guns, we should not overlook the influence they might have on us. We err if we speak with pride of how our guns can rip the heart out of another person. If we find pride in the act of administering death, the gun is stirring up the dark side in us. The power of a gun over us comes as we are tempted to find joy in what that gun might do to another person.
Plant a thought, reap an action, it is said, and are we not to believe that?
No, I do not know if Padgett ever expressed joy in the power of what a gun could do. But I hear many speak with pride of the damage a gun can do, and I have always narrowed my eyes at such talk, realizing where it could lead. So, Padgett was a straight arrow Mormon boy? Even a good person can go wrong if given the wrong influences. Though it might anger you that I should refer to a gun as a bad influence, please consider that it can become such. How much do you love it? The gun becomes your enemy when it becomes your best friend. If you are not careful, a gun will change your heart and damage it as much as it will damage the heart of the person it is fired at.
And, I thought of what I had written: "The gun becomes an enemy to society when it becomes its best friend." Had the gun become too much of a friend to Padgett? He loved guns. I do not know what brought him to do what he did, but I do wonder if his love of guns was part of it. For all the good we see in guns, we should not overlook the influence they might have on us. We err if we speak with pride of how our guns can rip the heart out of another person. If we find pride in the act of administering death, the gun is stirring up the dark side in us. The power of a gun over us comes as we are tempted to find joy in what that gun might do to another person.
Plant a thought, reap an action, it is said, and are we not to believe that?
No, I do not know if Padgett ever expressed joy in the power of what a gun could do. But I hear many speak with pride of the damage a gun can do, and I have always narrowed my eyes at such talk, realizing where it could lead. So, Padgett was a straight arrow Mormon boy? Even a good person can go wrong if given the wrong influences. Though it might anger you that I should refer to a gun as a bad influence, please consider that it can become such. How much do you love it? The gun becomes your enemy when it becomes your best friend. If you are not careful, a gun will change your heart and damage it as much as it will damage the heart of the person it is fired at.
Wednesday, June 11, 2014
They are Products of Society, Whether that Society is With Us or Others
So, we have so many mass murders, so many attacks on multiple people, that it almost seems they are daily.
And, we wonder what can be done.
One of the surest answers is getting no attention at all. Any person is influenceable. Any person can be affected by another. So, why don't we try to influence them? We, as a society, should see the need to be more nurturing, to be talking to those who are in danger of -- to use the term -- going off.
I would guess the neighbors we see as a little edgy are the neighbors we tend to shy away from. Perhaps that is our mistake. These are the ones who need our influence, our direction, and they will never get it if we do not walk into their circle of friends.
We've heard it said, It take a village to raise a child. Well, it also takes a village to keep a neighbor on the straight and narrow. We've heard it said that we are all products of our environment. Well, these people will be less likely to be good products if we don't offer to give them a good environment.
To put it in religious terms, Let your light so shine that it will be a light for others. I also think of the Savior's advice to Peter that when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren. In this case, that would mean not rushing in until you are strong enough to be the influencer, not the one being influenced.
And, we wonder what can be done.
One of the surest answers is getting no attention at all. Any person is influenceable. Any person can be affected by another. So, why don't we try to influence them? We, as a society, should see the need to be more nurturing, to be talking to those who are in danger of -- to use the term -- going off.
I would guess the neighbors we see as a little edgy are the neighbors we tend to shy away from. Perhaps that is our mistake. These are the ones who need our influence, our direction, and they will never get it if we do not walk into their circle of friends.
We've heard it said, It take a village to raise a child. Well, it also takes a village to keep a neighbor on the straight and narrow. We've heard it said that we are all products of our environment. Well, these people will be less likely to be good products if we don't offer to give them a good environment.
To put it in religious terms, Let your light so shine that it will be a light for others. I also think of the Savior's advice to Peter that when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren. In this case, that would mean not rushing in until you are strong enough to be the influencer, not the one being influenced.
Tuesday, June 10, 2014
Not Believing in Same-Sex Marriages does not a Bigot Make
Do we discriminate when we do not allow of same sex to marry each other? Here's why we don't. Is this a form of prejudice? Here's why it isn't.
Not allowing same-sex couples to marry is not to be classed with discrimination against blacks or against Jews or against women. Discrimination against blacks put them down simply because they are blacks. Discrimination against Jews puts them down just because they are Jews. Discrimination against women puts them down simply because they are women.
Those who oppose same-sex marriage do it because they read the Bible and see God saying homosexual relationships are wrong. They do not oppose the marriages simply as a way of putting another person down. They dutifully oppose the marriages because they believe God says same-sex relations are wrong.
Here is a comparable form of :discrimination. Tell me if the people who practice this form of discrimination are to be classed with racists. Let's say a person picks up the Bible and reads a couple verses in Proverbs and conclude that drinking is a sin. "Wine is a mocker, strong drink is raging: and whosoever is deceived thereby is not wise," says Proverb 20:1. "Who hath woe? who hath sorrow? who hath contentions? who hath babbling? who hath redness of eyes? They that tarry long at the wine; they that go to seek mixed wine," says Proverb 23:29.
So, the reader concludes too much alcohol is a sin. So it is with same-sex relations. Some pick up the Bible, read it, and conclude such relationships are wrong.
Not allowing same-sex couples to marry is not to be classed with discrimination against blacks or against Jews or against women. Discrimination against blacks put them down simply because they are blacks. Discrimination against Jews puts them down just because they are Jews. Discrimination against women puts them down simply because they are women.
Those who oppose same-sex marriage do it because they read the Bible and see God saying homosexual relationships are wrong. They do not oppose the marriages simply as a way of putting another person down. They dutifully oppose the marriages because they believe God says same-sex relations are wrong.
Here is a comparable form of :discrimination. Tell me if the people who practice this form of discrimination are to be classed with racists. Let's say a person picks up the Bible and reads a couple verses in Proverbs and conclude that drinking is a sin. "Wine is a mocker, strong drink is raging: and whosoever is deceived thereby is not wise," says Proverb 20:1. "Who hath woe? who hath sorrow? who hath contentions? who hath babbling? who hath redness of eyes? They that tarry long at the wine; they that go to seek mixed wine," says Proverb 23:29.
So, the reader concludes too much alcohol is a sin. So it is with same-sex relations. Some pick up the Bible, read it, and conclude such relationships are wrong.
Monday, June 9, 2014
Why Don't We Believe in the Free Market When it Comes to Electricity?
I'm scratching my head as to why we don't have a free market energy system. Please tell me, tell me again. Why can't I buy a little electricity from one company, and a little more from another.
The free market, we've always believed it it. Why don't we when it comes to power?
The power lines could be shared, either owned as a government utility, or, perhaps better, owned as a joint venture by the competing power companies. Obviously, we couldn't have each company running its own lines.
If I wanted to buy wind farm electricity, I could. If I wanted to buy electricity from a plant in Delta, I could. Maybe there would even be two competing companies getting their power from the Delta plant.
Whatever is wrong with competition? Perhaps it would help to keep prices low. So, can anybody tell me why we don't believe in the free market when it comes to electricity?
The free market, we've always believed it it. Why don't we when it comes to power?
The power lines could be shared, either owned as a government utility, or, perhaps better, owned as a joint venture by the competing power companies. Obviously, we couldn't have each company running its own lines.
If I wanted to buy wind farm electricity, I could. If I wanted to buy electricity from a plant in Delta, I could. Maybe there would even be two competing companies getting their power from the Delta plant.
Whatever is wrong with competition? Perhaps it would help to keep prices low. So, can anybody tell me why we don't believe in the free market when it comes to electricity?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)