Marriage and family are essential to the Plan of Salvation. The Proclamation on the family issued in 1995 says this much. Hence Latter-day Saints and Christians should pay close attention to efforts to redefine marriage. Ross Douthat, a New York Times columnist, wrote an article exploring the impact of gay marriage on the marriage culture. One thing people on both sides of the marriage debate can agree on is that the surge of gay marriage will change our culture's understanding of marriage. Douthat highlights three possible directions marriage will go. Some argue that gay marriage will be good for gays in the sense that it will promote stable, monogamous relationships in the gay community. Gay commitment to marriage will, in turn, strengthen marriage as a whole, as being a stable and enduring institution. An author who has written on this subject predicts that same-sex marriages will strengthen “marriage’s standard for committed relationships” across all society. A somewhat different prediction is that gay marriage will “partially transform marriage from within.” Most noteworthy is the change in marriage sexual mores, away from sexual monogamy toward sanctioned infidelity. One gay activist hopes that same-sex marriage will end up redefining marriage “simply as a pact of mutual love and care” wherein gay and straight married couples are free to negotiate occasional sexual encounters outside the bonds of marriage. The final prediction is the direst. There are some activists “who hope that gay marriage will knock marriage off its cultural pedestal altogether.” They want to abolish marriage as a “gold standard” for committed relationships. They hope to achieve this objective by having same-sex couples who have no intent on honoring marriage vows get married. They want to weaken marriage by denigrating it. They don’t want marriage. They want marriage to go away. With regard to the first prediction, we do not need gay marriage to strengthen the institution of marriage, and I doubt that same-sex marriage would ever accomplish such a thing. If the gay community wants to strengthen marriage it could support traditional marriage as being between a man and woman and stop pushing for a redefinition. To their credit, some gay people are doing this. The traditional concept of marriage isn’t broken, so let’s not try to fix it. The second prediction is very troublesome. It wants to redefine acceptable sexual relations within the bonds of marriage. Sanctioned infidelity would end up destroying marriage because it would eliminate a core component of marriage, namely sexual commitment to one person. Take out monogamy and marriage becomes little more than a relationship driven by economic and sexual convenience. The final prediction involves complete obliteration of marriage. Activists who take this position see marriage as promoting emotional and sexual fidelity that is antithetical to their vision of a free-for-all, sexual anarchy. They cannot live in long term, committed relationships themselves so they want to eliminate anything that promotes fidelity as the norm. They want infidelity and promiscuity to be the norm. The only way to achieve this is goal is to tear down the current norm. Clearly we are facing forces that will, if they get their way, lead to the disintegration of marriage and the traditional family. Such changes will have dire consequences. The Proclamation warns that “the disintegration of the family will bring upon individuals, communities, and nations the calamities foretold by ancient and modern prophets.” I hope this doesn't happen, but it seems that as a society, we are headed in that direction. 10 Comments I teach a college course on research design. One of the topics is surveys and privacy. I tell the students that marketing surveys are infamous for collecting people’s private information, especially those attached to product registration forms. Have you ever wondered what your income, age, and the number of people living in your house have to do with registering a new stereo or appliance? Nothing. Companies are collecting information for marketing purposes, and some of it is very personal. Being asked to surrender that kind of information is really no different than a stranger coming up to you on the street and asking: 1. What is your race? 2. How many people are in your home? 3. What are your hobbies? 4. Do you have credit cards? If so, how many? 5. How much money do you make? 6. How old are you? Kind of freaky, eh? Many people don’t realize that this is an invasion of privacy, which might explain why many people don’t seem to realize that submitting to a scan or invasive pat down at the airport is also an invasion of privacy. Taking nude photos or touching the breasts of our wives and daughters at the airport is not a necessary evil to ensure safe travel – it is an unnecessary invasion of privacy, plain and freakin’ simple. How did we get here? I don’t blame the president. I don’t blame the bosses at the TSA. I don’t even put all the blame on terrorists. I blame this invasion of privacy on those who have perpetuated the falsehood that it is wrong to profile. “Oh no!” you say. We sheeple have been taught that it is wrong to profile (i.e., stereotype). “We can’t do that.” Baloney. You do it all the time. That’s right. You stereotype all the time (i.e., form impressions of people based on past experience with similar looking and sounding people). You do it whenever you talk to a stranger. You do it whenever you walk away from a suspicious looking stranger. You do it whenever you ask someone for help on the side of the street or at a gas station. Stereotyping is human nature. Stereotypes are sometimes correct and sometimes incorrect - the fact that they are sometimes incorrect does not mean that we should ignore them. They are useful guides. So enough already. Enough frisking of caucasian grandmothers with Utah accents. Enough patting down young American children who look like they’ve just gotten out of school. Enough frisking of WW II veterans carrying US passports. And enough taking nude photos of hispanic, native, black, and caucasian young women who dress and talk like Americans. Enough already! See that foreigner over there who dresses and talks like an easterner and carries a Saudi Arabian passport? That is the guy you should be giving an enhanced pat down because he dresses and talks like the kind of people who are currently trying to kill us. See that American over there who is dressed like a gang banger and looks like he could have weapons stored in his baggy pants? That is the guy you should be taking nude photos of. See that foreigner over there with a one-way ticket who is not checking any luggage? That is the person who should be taken aside for questioning. Americans have been brained washed into thinking that stereotyping is un-American and a violation of our liberties. Rather than rely on useful stereotypes, we require everyone to go through nude body scanners or intrusive pat downs. In the name of preserving liberties (by not stereotyping), we’ve surrendered liberties (by subjecting everyone to scans). Are we living in some sort of bizzaro world? A final note. No country faces more threats from terrorism than Israel, but Israel does not require its citizens to go through scanners or enhanced pat downs at airports. They don’t even have scanners. So how does Israel handle its security at airport check points? That’s right – it profiles. (Please, no comments on the definition of stereotyping. I’ve read, studied, and taught this subject. And no comments on whether the scanner photos are really nude photos – they are sufficiently revealing to raise concerns. Also, I oppose any kind of stereotyping [accurate & inaccurate] that results in harmful discrimination.) Mormons Have Religious Smarts 09/30/2010
Good news everyone! Three hours of Sunday church service and weekday church meetings are paying off in more than spiritual ways. All that instruction is making us religiously smart, so says recent research by the Pew Forum on religion and public life. Pew research shows that “Atheists and agnostics, Jews and Mormons are among the highest-scoring groups . . . of religious knowledge, outperforming evangelical Protestants, mainline Protestants and Catholics on questions about the core teachings, history and leading figures of major world religions.” On a test of 32 religious questions, “Atheists and agnostics average 20.9 correct answers. Jews and Mormons do about as well, averaging 20.5 and 20.3 correct answers, respectively. Protestants as a whole average 16 correct answers; Catholics as a whole, 14.7. Atheists and agnostics, Jews and Mormons perform better than other groups on the survey even after controlling for differing levels of education.” Way to go everyone! Perhaps this study will help convince the evangelical community that Mormons are religiously informed people. You see, by and large they think we are deceived members of a cult. Case in point: The evangelical response to Glenn Beck’s recent revival in Washington DC. Christiannewswire.com is skeptical about Beck’s ability to create a religious revival in America because of his religion, Mormonism. The website brings up many of the old arguments against Mormonism. Here’s a sampling. 1. Our country was founded on Judeo-Christian values. Mormonism is not a Christian denomination but a cult of Christianity. My response: According to latter-day scripture America was founded for the purpose of bringing forth the Book of Mormon and the restoration of the gospel of Jesus Christ (aka Mormonism). 2. The country needs to get back to the simplicity of the Bible. The reason our country is in bad shape is that ministers for the most part do not share the truth. Many endorse false gospels including Mormonism. My response: America is a better place because of the Restoration (aka Mormonism). Blaming Mormonism and accusing Mormons of not being Christian has been going on for a long time. These sorts of accusations have been a major stumbling block for many evangelicals, thus keeping them from the blessings of the Restored gospel. Removing these stumbling blocks from evangelicals’ minds seems a big a task, kind of like taking down the Iron Curtain, but we all know what the Lord did to that barrier. I welcome the day when the evangelical community declares that members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (aka Mormons) are Christian. The Pew study will hopefully help in this regard. In this world of increasing secularism, America will be better off if evangelicals and Mormons set aside their differences and unite in the cause of promoting traditional Christian values.  Recently homosexual activists have succeeded in gaining medical, employment, and insurance benefits for same-sex partnerships (e.g., granted to federal government workers in June 2009). In California they have succeeded in getting the gay lifestyle into elementary school curriculum with the proviso that kids cannot opt out (passed May, 2009). And in Montana they have succeeded in getting a school district to consider sex education for young children that includes instruction on same-sex intercourse. It may surprise you to learn that none of these accomplishments is the ultimate objective of homosexual activists. Their grand prize is to repeal the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) signed into law in 1996 by President Bill Clinton. DOMA states that the federal government recognizes marriage as between a man and a woman, and that no state can be forced to recognize same-sex marriages from other states. The activists are working hard on getting DOMA repealed. One of their covert operatives, an activist judge named Joseph Tauro from NY, recently ruled that DOMA is unconstitutional. Don’t be misled about activists’ reasons for repealing DOMA. Repealing DOMA is not about allowing gay couples to marry for the sake of being married. It is about normalizing homosexuality. Even some activists who read this post will be surprised to learn this fact. It is not about marriage; it is about getting society to approve of the homosexual lifestyle. If DOMA is repealed, I predict that our fundamental understanding of marriage will gradually be transformed. Indeed, transforming marriage may very well be an objective of some activists. According to the words of one gay activist, after winning the “fight for same-sex marriage and its benefits, . . . [we’ll] redefine the institution of marriage completely, to demand the right to marry not as a way of adhering to society's moral codes but rather to debunk a myth and radically alter an archaic institution” (Michelangelo Signorile, OUT Magazine, December, 1994). If our society allows a radical altering of the divinely appointed institution of marriage, this will, as stated in the Proclamation on the Family, “bring upon individuals, communities, and nations the calamities foretold by ancient and modern prophets.” As Latter-day Saints we have a moral obligation to support Judaeo-Christian values and, in particular, traditional marriage. Find out what’s going on in your schools and communities and get involved. How well do you know this woman? 06/30/2010
 How well do you know this woman? Do you want her to be the next Supreme Court justice? She's never been a judge, and her paper trail is short, but is that enough to prove that she is not a clear and present danger to the Constitution? Share your feelings in this online poll. America's Uncomfortable Tango with China 02/11/2010
Last week the Pentagon announced a 6.4 billion dollar arms deal with Taiwan. The package includes 114 Patriot missiles, 60 Black Hawk helicopters and communications equipment for Taiwan's F-16 fighter fleet. Taiwan is purchasing the weapons in the hopes of boosting national security – against who? China. Beijing claims that it owns Taiwan. It comes as no surprise that it does not want this weapons deal to go through. So how will China react to the sale? Will it take military action against Taiwan or the United States? No. Will it stop exporting Made in China goods? No. It has a more passive aggressive retaliation. It could dump its holdings of US treasury notes (dollars). (http://washingtontimes.com/news/2010/feb/10/chinese-see-us-debt-as-weapon/) China has $800 billion US treasury notes. On Monday February 8, 2010 the Chinese military asked their government to consider selling off US debt securities as punishment for the US-Taiwan arms deal. This is a form of economic warfare that could bring the US economy to its knees. If Beijing dumped those treasury notes it would most certainly drive down the already weakened US dollar, harm our weak economy, and drive up inflation and interest rates. However, as one economist pointed out, the US and China are in a dance that neither partner can stop. If China dumped its US notes and harmed the US economy, then it would be economically harming its best customer. Also, if China tanked the US dollar by dumping many of its US notes, then it would devalue its remaining US notes; however, it appears the Bush and Obama administrations’ reckless spending policies are already doing a fine job of this. And the US needs China to continue exporting products to feed our insatiable appetite for inexpensive goods, and we need them to hold US debt incurred through costly government bailout programs. So our dance card is full for the next 100 songs. That wouldn’t be so bad if each slot weren’t filled by the same partner - China. Dancing with the same partner over and over, and never really liking that partner in the first place, is getting a bit tedious.  There is a man who once had a drinking problem and a foul mouth problem. But he has two redeeming values that made up for his personal shortcomings – he believes in the sanctity of marriage and he believes in living within your means. It was the latter, his commitment to fiscal conservatism, that catapulted him from a local news reporter to one of the most successful provincial premiers Canada has ever known. (For those unfamiliar with Canadian politics, a province is the equivalent of a state, and a provincial premier is the equivalent of a state’s governor.) During the early 1990s when most Canadian provinces where growing their provincial debts with massive deficit spending, a different kind of politician ascended to the premier’s office in Alberta. His name is Ralph Klein. “Ralph”, as he preferred to be called, campaigned on the promises of cutting deficit spending and repaying Alberta’s 23 billion dollar debt. After he was elected premier in 1992, Ralph quickly went to work cutting wasteful government programs. He reduced spending on the arts and on burgeoning social programs for welfare recipients. He even offered to buy bus passes for welfare recipients who wanted to move to other provinces with more generous welfare programs. Ralph closed expensive and outdated medical facilities, laid off unneeded health care workers, and even rolled back the salaries of all government funded employees a few percentage points, including his own. I was a student in Alberta when all this was happening. I saw an old hospital in Lethbridge, Alberta named St. Marks get torn down because it was an old building and services could be absorbed by a newer medical facility nearby. I worked in social services with handicapped adults to pay my bills, and heard many people at work gripe about Ralph’s policies of fiscal restraint. Ralph got on a lot of people’s nerves with his unusual ways, but I sensed that what he was doing was good for Alberta, and history has shown this to be true. True to his campaign promises, Ralph eliminated deficit spending and, in 2005, paid off Alberta’s 23 billion dollar debt. Thanks to Ralph’s fiscal conservatism, Alberta is now one of the most prosperous provinces in Canada. It is the only province without a provincial sales tax. His brand of fiscal conservatism has spread to other provinces that are trying to come to terms with deficit spending and massive debts. Finally, rather than becoming a life long politician, Ralph voluntarily stepped down as premier in 2006. He went to the premier’s office to bring fiscal responsibility to Alberta. Once that mission was accomplished, he resigned. Ralph Klein was an unusual politician. I wish there were more like him, especially during these times of life-long politicians and out-of-control deficit spending. | Welcome to the Religion and Science (R&S) Blog. Feel free to post your comments. Please be courteous.    CategoriesAll ArchivesJanuary 2012 |
RSS Feed