I know; I can't believe I am still writing about this either.
It's just that I suddenly felt that it made sense, at least in a different way than I had understood it before, though that didn't mean that it was handled in the best way possible.
I was thinking that the protecting children part was about how if they are hearing one thing at church and another at home it could be confusing, because that was pretty much how it was phrased. Then it suddenly came to me that if you have children being baptized at eight and then in their teens deciding that the favoring of heterosexual marriage is wrong and unfair, that teenager could then break sacred covenants that it would be better not to have made in the first place.
If you don't believe there is any power in the covenants, then that sounds like a stupid concern. There might be less reason to care about it, except on a level of social exclusion, and I think a lot of people are looking at it that way, but this seems like it could have been communicated much more clearly. After all, when you are talking about protecting children and also referencing homosexuality, there is a history of gay people being portrayed as predatory and corrupting anyway that you don't want to echo.
This is one reason that the desire for a more diverse leadership is reasonable. People with different experiences can hear things in different ways and pick up on different things, and that is valuable. I do think if it was explained this way, that we have children who make covenants that they break later because of the conflict between what home says and church says, and it is better that they make the decision as adults, I think people would get that. You can understand your baptismal covenants at one level at eight, but there are a lot of things about life that you don't understand.
There is the feeling of exclusion still, and for people who believe that the church will eventually accept same-sex relationships there is not much comfort that it is not happening now, but viewed in that way it still makes sense.
There is still the matter of the baby blessings. That is not a saving ordinance, so it feels like it should be open to anyone. Apparently it was brought up because it creates a record, and then that is a child of record that the church keeps track of, and where there is the assumption of baptism at eight. I have some thoughts on that as well.
My mission was serving Laotian refugees, and there were a lot of people baptized a few years earlier who were completely inactive. The first missionaries to start teaching them did not speak the language, and there is a sense that it was rushed and there may have been some over-zealousness in offering people couches and clothes and beds, because many of them were poor.
I completely understand the frustration of trying to keep track of people who are not coming and are not interested, and I often thought it would have been better if many of them had never been baptized. I get that.
I also know that it was amazing how receptive some of their children were. A lot of the families did go for a while, so there's no knowing how many primary lessons they got, but at the time I really saw how receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost could be beneficial, even when there was not a lot of nurturing and instruction that followed.
So I see both sides of that, and drafting a policy when there is a whole range of individuals and circumstances with so many different possibilities is a difficult thing.
What I do know is that it all gets easier when people stop being awful. If people will spend more time loving and serving than judging and condemning it will work well. Let's all focus on that.
Sunday, November 29, 2015
Sunday, November 22, 2015
Water!
This is kind of getting back to earthquakes, but not specifically so.
I was talking with some people about it, and how you need to be prepared for longer than three days now, which for a long time was the gold standard. Now it is more common to hear 7-10 days, and it occurred to me that I want two weeks worth of water.
We do not have two weeks worth of water. That would be a lot. It becomes very difficult to store and find containers for that amount.
It used to be easy to find 50-gallon barrels, but that has become less common lately, because shipping them is expensive even when they are empty and moving them around when they are full is difficult.
Still, I want two weeks worth of water. I want that even being very impressed with my local water district's emergency planning, and knowing that they are collaborating with other local water districts, so water in this area should be doing pretty well.
I believe in inspiration, so if knowing all that my goal is still two weeks worth of water, then that's what I should be trying for.
I also believe in doing things at a reasonable pace, and I feel okay about that, so I am not going to panic right now. Some of our water storage is in one-gallon containers that Winco sells. These are not in the HDPE milk jug style plastic, which is not suitable for storage, but in the hard PETE plastic.
I bet we can get a few of those this week. That's something we can build up.
We don't have room for a two week supply of those, but we can add some more now and then work out where the rest will go later.
Also, it is worth remembering that we have the water heater, which is full of water. Yes, it can collect some sediment, though it shouldn't collect very much, but that's something I can look into, both for how quickly it should amass sediment and how to rinse that out, because there is a method for doing that. I still want to have two weeks worth of water outside of the tank, but the tank can augment the supply until we get there.
Water may not be your hot issue, but if you work on preparedness you will probably discover your hot issue. It may be something you can work on gradually, or you may feel a need to speed it up, but developing the ability to listen and hear is the greatest tool for preparation that there is.
I was talking with some people about it, and how you need to be prepared for longer than three days now, which for a long time was the gold standard. Now it is more common to hear 7-10 days, and it occurred to me that I want two weeks worth of water.
We do not have two weeks worth of water. That would be a lot. It becomes very difficult to store and find containers for that amount.
It used to be easy to find 50-gallon barrels, but that has become less common lately, because shipping them is expensive even when they are empty and moving them around when they are full is difficult.
Still, I want two weeks worth of water. I want that even being very impressed with my local water district's emergency planning, and knowing that they are collaborating with other local water districts, so water in this area should be doing pretty well.
I believe in inspiration, so if knowing all that my goal is still two weeks worth of water, then that's what I should be trying for.
I also believe in doing things at a reasonable pace, and I feel okay about that, so I am not going to panic right now. Some of our water storage is in one-gallon containers that Winco sells. These are not in the HDPE milk jug style plastic, which is not suitable for storage, but in the hard PETE plastic.
I bet we can get a few of those this week. That's something we can build up.
We don't have room for a two week supply of those, but we can add some more now and then work out where the rest will go later.
Also, it is worth remembering that we have the water heater, which is full of water. Yes, it can collect some sediment, though it shouldn't collect very much, but that's something I can look into, both for how quickly it should amass sediment and how to rinse that out, because there is a method for doing that. I still want to have two weeks worth of water outside of the tank, but the tank can augment the supply until we get there.
Water may not be your hot issue, but if you work on preparedness you will probably discover your hot issue. It may be something you can work on gradually, or you may feel a need to speed it up, but developing the ability to listen and hear is the greatest tool for preparation that there is.
Sunday, November 15, 2015
Responding in difficult times
I really wanted to get back to the Cascadia Megaquake. I think next week I will, but last week it felt important to write what I did.
I mention that for two reasons. One is that I seem to have a few more things to say this week, but also I learned of the terrorism attacks in Paris when I was close to posting a music review.
When things like that happen, it always feels like the other things that I put out there are trivial. Right now my songs of the day are Muppet songs, and the band I reviewed Thursday wasn't that good. So sometimes there is this feeling like I shouldn't do it, and then I pretty much always do it anyway.
That may be partly just my personality - kind of bull-headed, yes, but also I get focused on tasks and then I need to complete them. However that came about, I have decided it's important to post those things anyway, because in these times if we waited for there to be no tragedies then we would never do anything at all. We've gotten to where there are a lot of things that don't even register. There are a lot of bombings and shootings we don't even notice anymore, because they are so common.
A world like that is cause for concern, and for action. If I were going to post something that would contribute to the ugliness I should stop myself, but I should have done that before the tragedy happened to. My usual pursuits are spreading knowledge, sharing things that I think are cool, and turning a spotlight on bands (some of which aren't great but a lot of them are) because I believe art is important, and individuals are important, and that giving people a chance is important. So that's what I do and I can live with that.
And often if I take several weeks to get to a current event, that may be the amount of time it takes me to feel like I have a handle on it. When my feelings tell me there is an immediate need, then I follow that.
Those things are more obvious in my main blog, because it has a wider range. This blog and the travel blog are more focused, but even in the travel blog I once found that I could not write about the aquarium until I watched and wrote about Blackfish.
I wanted to clarify that, but also I have some things to say about what I don't say.
It occurred to me after last week that it is possible to read a lot of my posts and not know what my actual opinion is on some hot issues.
That is pretty deliberate. Picking a side will often alienate people who could benefit from reading it, but also, thinking there are two diametrically opposed sides is often a gross oversimplification. Even if you could draw a fairly clear line roughly in the middle, there would be nuances and gradations on either side, and if I'm writing about it there is probably already too much division.
Also, I am often still learning, and I see new aspects later that I hadn't realized, but because my focus was on things to think about, and to remember while thinking about, instead of telling people what to think, the post still holds up. It would be pretty presumptuous for me to tell people what to think, but if I can give some guidance on thinking better, that is so what I am all about.
This leads to something I didn't write about last week, but I do think I need to address. For a lot of people the new handbook guidelines seemed to lead to them thinking about whether it was time to leave the church.
That is a question that puts me on guard, because I have seen many people who said they only wanted some time off from church, and they changed in ways that they never expected, losing something precious. It is easy to underestimate the cost.
However, I am also always learning. I have a friend who was in a really toxic ward who turned against her. They were clearly wrong, and she did not have the energy to fight it, so she has been taking time off from church, and I can't fault her. Someone fighting it could have been a good thing, but that doesn't mean it was her responsibility.
The point of that is that there can be a lot of legitimate decisions, and I can't judge that or tell you what to do. I can say that it is better to be making decision by attempting to do what is right, and praying about it, than seeking vengeance. I could say that, but my thought is that if I had a toxic ward trying to punish me, I would fight it until they were all the ones needing a rest. That sounds pretty vengeful. Again, that doesn't mean that fighting it would be wrong, but there might be good and not so good ways of doing it, and some mindsets are better than others.
So if some people feel a need to take a break, or write a letter to the First Presidency, or wear a rainbow tie to church, or have prayed about it and reconciled themselves, all of those things can be okay. Life can be tricky. It's because of all the flawed people, but you're one of them. Welcome!
There is one thing I am completely comfortable in judging though, and so I'll finish with that.
Since the news of the handbook changes came out, I have been hearing stories of abuse. This includes an anonymous note on a car telling someone that since they were apostate, and their presence was bringing everyone else down, that this was a good time for them to stop coming, and another person goading the children of a lesbian mother, tearing her down to them.
The church leadership may not have handled their situation as well as they could have, but I do believe their purposes were to avoid conflicts, not to give fuel to persecution.
The Gospel is a good yardstick for measuring your own life; it is not intended to be a cudgel for beating everyone else. That is a sin.
If you are a bishop or stake president you will have times when you need to counsel with people about their behavior, and there can be some judgement there, but it should be done with enough love and desire for the welfare of the person that the judgement is not the most noticeable part.
If you're not in that position, you do not get to judge, you do not get to make anonymous suggestions, and you do not get to harass. Then you have the greater sin. If those things sound at all attractive to you, read D&C section 121 again and see if you can figure out what your motivations are.
I mention that for two reasons. One is that I seem to have a few more things to say this week, but also I learned of the terrorism attacks in Paris when I was close to posting a music review.
When things like that happen, it always feels like the other things that I put out there are trivial. Right now my songs of the day are Muppet songs, and the band I reviewed Thursday wasn't that good. So sometimes there is this feeling like I shouldn't do it, and then I pretty much always do it anyway.
That may be partly just my personality - kind of bull-headed, yes, but also I get focused on tasks and then I need to complete them. However that came about, I have decided it's important to post those things anyway, because in these times if we waited for there to be no tragedies then we would never do anything at all. We've gotten to where there are a lot of things that don't even register. There are a lot of bombings and shootings we don't even notice anymore, because they are so common.
A world like that is cause for concern, and for action. If I were going to post something that would contribute to the ugliness I should stop myself, but I should have done that before the tragedy happened to. My usual pursuits are spreading knowledge, sharing things that I think are cool, and turning a spotlight on bands (some of which aren't great but a lot of them are) because I believe art is important, and individuals are important, and that giving people a chance is important. So that's what I do and I can live with that.
And often if I take several weeks to get to a current event, that may be the amount of time it takes me to feel like I have a handle on it. When my feelings tell me there is an immediate need, then I follow that.
Those things are more obvious in my main blog, because it has a wider range. This blog and the travel blog are more focused, but even in the travel blog I once found that I could not write about the aquarium until I watched and wrote about Blackfish.
I wanted to clarify that, but also I have some things to say about what I don't say.
It occurred to me after last week that it is possible to read a lot of my posts and not know what my actual opinion is on some hot issues.
That is pretty deliberate. Picking a side will often alienate people who could benefit from reading it, but also, thinking there are two diametrically opposed sides is often a gross oversimplification. Even if you could draw a fairly clear line roughly in the middle, there would be nuances and gradations on either side, and if I'm writing about it there is probably already too much division.
Also, I am often still learning, and I see new aspects later that I hadn't realized, but because my focus was on things to think about, and to remember while thinking about, instead of telling people what to think, the post still holds up. It would be pretty presumptuous for me to tell people what to think, but if I can give some guidance on thinking better, that is so what I am all about.
This leads to something I didn't write about last week, but I do think I need to address. For a lot of people the new handbook guidelines seemed to lead to them thinking about whether it was time to leave the church.
That is a question that puts me on guard, because I have seen many people who said they only wanted some time off from church, and they changed in ways that they never expected, losing something precious. It is easy to underestimate the cost.
However, I am also always learning. I have a friend who was in a really toxic ward who turned against her. They were clearly wrong, and she did not have the energy to fight it, so she has been taking time off from church, and I can't fault her. Someone fighting it could have been a good thing, but that doesn't mean it was her responsibility.
The point of that is that there can be a lot of legitimate decisions, and I can't judge that or tell you what to do. I can say that it is better to be making decision by attempting to do what is right, and praying about it, than seeking vengeance. I could say that, but my thought is that if I had a toxic ward trying to punish me, I would fight it until they were all the ones needing a rest. That sounds pretty vengeful. Again, that doesn't mean that fighting it would be wrong, but there might be good and not so good ways of doing it, and some mindsets are better than others.
So if some people feel a need to take a break, or write a letter to the First Presidency, or wear a rainbow tie to church, or have prayed about it and reconciled themselves, all of those things can be okay. Life can be tricky. It's because of all the flawed people, but you're one of them. Welcome!
There is one thing I am completely comfortable in judging though, and so I'll finish with that.
Since the news of the handbook changes came out, I have been hearing stories of abuse. This includes an anonymous note on a car telling someone that since they were apostate, and their presence was bringing everyone else down, that this was a good time for them to stop coming, and another person goading the children of a lesbian mother, tearing her down to them.
The church leadership may not have handled their situation as well as they could have, but I do believe their purposes were to avoid conflicts, not to give fuel to persecution.
The Gospel is a good yardstick for measuring your own life; it is not intended to be a cudgel for beating everyone else. That is a sin.
If you are a bishop or stake president you will have times when you need to counsel with people about their behavior, and there can be some judgement there, but it should be done with enough love and desire for the welfare of the person that the judgement is not the most noticeable part.
If you're not in that position, you do not get to judge, you do not get to make anonymous suggestions, and you do not get to harass. Then you have the greater sin. If those things sound at all attractive to you, read D&C section 121 again and see if you can figure out what your motivations are.
Sunday, November 8, 2015
Not infallible
There are two reactions to Pope Francis that I find interesting. I do find him likable and think that he is a good man. He looks especially good when compared to Pope Benedict. However, I think it is kind of silly when people get mad at him for not being liberal enough. You know how sometimes people illustrate how obvious something is by asking "Is the Pope Catholic?" Well, yes, he is. It is probably more productive to appreciate that he cares about climate change and economic inequality than to be mad that he still considers abortion a sin, though a forgivable one.
The other thing that I found interesting was when some people would get so angry at him for being more liberal, especially conservative Catholics. The Pope is supposed to be infallible, right? Don't you still think he's infallible?
We have never said that any of our leaders are infallible. We believe they are good men, and they are inspired, but we also believe they are human. There is room for error. Especially once you include local leaders, there's a lot of room for error.
Does it sound like I am getting to the new handbook instructions? I am.
Still, I am not necessarily going to write as much about that as I could. I have covered some of this ground before. I have written about believing in prophets and how things change before, most notably in a series from January 19. 2014 to February 23, 2014. I have written about gay marriage and homosexuality before:
http://preparedspork.blogspot.com/2013/06/preparing-for-marriage-equality.html
http://preparedspork.blogspot.com/2014/01/homosexuality-again.html
I do still have some thoughts on this particular thing, some more specific and some general.
Listening to Elder Christofferson, it sounds like the concern is more for if you have a household with a same-sex couple and children, and how it could be hard for the children to reconcile what they see at home and what they hear at church:
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865640934/Elder-Christofferson-explains-updated-LDS-Church-policies-on-same-sex-marriage-and-children.html
I get that, but most of the people that I am thinking about are cases where one of the parents came out later, after there were children, so there are two households, one with a parent who probably had a pretty traumatic divorce and felt very betrayed, and now their kids can't even follow the normal path.
Initially I thought that this was poorly considered and would be walked back soon. Now I feel more like it will be that there are a lot of exceptions granted. I am sure there will be some growing pains. Those are my specific thoughts on this specific policy.
For my more general thoughts, one area that is frustrating in conference talks and things is that I often feel like the church is worrying more about the people who are thinking that someday gay couples will go to the temple, but my worry is more about the people who are always looking for validation that in fact all gay people are perverts and they knew it all along. I get really irritated with those people, and they get far too much validation which is often undeserved.
However, I believe that hard times are coming up for them too. The Church is putting out more documentation from its past. There is more information out there. Some people will find it disturbing - for example, could a major policy have just been decided and then upheld due to racism?
And then, when you look closer, you might find that it's not quite so simple, but also that a leader was allowed to be wrong, and maybe he was allowed to be wrong because so many members were willing to be wrong, and that doesn't invalidate everything but it is a lot to take in, especially if your faith so far has been built upon not thinking so much.
I think there are hard times coming. These are already hard times now, but they will get harder. There's a reason that only half of the virgins made it into the wedding.
That is not a happy thought, but what is a happy thought is that there is a plan. There is work in the spirit world, there is the Millennium for some things to be made up, and eternity for the rest. There is the Atonement, not just for forgiveness, and physical healing, but also emotional spiritual healing.
There can be legitimate questions about how to deal with any particular policy. Are there times when more needs to be said? For now, one thing I specifically want to be aware of is that there are people who are really hurt by this, and I want to be supportive of them. I am still going to church. I am still doing family history. I want to go to the temple Thursday. I will also correct anyone who says something really stupid.
It can be frustrating that sometimes we have such a hard time collectively finding the right balance, but I know my own struggles with doing so, and there are some ways in which I kind of have it together. Of course we mess up! I frustrate myself quite a bit too, but I remain amazed and grateful for the Lord's patience with us, and continued trust of us.
The other thing that I found interesting was when some people would get so angry at him for being more liberal, especially conservative Catholics. The Pope is supposed to be infallible, right? Don't you still think he's infallible?
We have never said that any of our leaders are infallible. We believe they are good men, and they are inspired, but we also believe they are human. There is room for error. Especially once you include local leaders, there's a lot of room for error.
Does it sound like I am getting to the new handbook instructions? I am.
Still, I am not necessarily going to write as much about that as I could. I have covered some of this ground before. I have written about believing in prophets and how things change before, most notably in a series from January 19. 2014 to February 23, 2014. I have written about gay marriage and homosexuality before:
http://preparedspork.blogspot.com/2013/06/preparing-for-marriage-equality.html
http://preparedspork.blogspot.com/2014/01/homosexuality-again.html
I do still have some thoughts on this particular thing, some more specific and some general.
Listening to Elder Christofferson, it sounds like the concern is more for if you have a household with a same-sex couple and children, and how it could be hard for the children to reconcile what they see at home and what they hear at church:
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/865640934/Elder-Christofferson-explains-updated-LDS-Church-policies-on-same-sex-marriage-and-children.html
I get that, but most of the people that I am thinking about are cases where one of the parents came out later, after there were children, so there are two households, one with a parent who probably had a pretty traumatic divorce and felt very betrayed, and now their kids can't even follow the normal path.
Initially I thought that this was poorly considered and would be walked back soon. Now I feel more like it will be that there are a lot of exceptions granted. I am sure there will be some growing pains. Those are my specific thoughts on this specific policy.
For my more general thoughts, one area that is frustrating in conference talks and things is that I often feel like the church is worrying more about the people who are thinking that someday gay couples will go to the temple, but my worry is more about the people who are always looking for validation that in fact all gay people are perverts and they knew it all along. I get really irritated with those people, and they get far too much validation which is often undeserved.
However, I believe that hard times are coming up for them too. The Church is putting out more documentation from its past. There is more information out there. Some people will find it disturbing - for example, could a major policy have just been decided and then upheld due to racism?
And then, when you look closer, you might find that it's not quite so simple, but also that a leader was allowed to be wrong, and maybe he was allowed to be wrong because so many members were willing to be wrong, and that doesn't invalidate everything but it is a lot to take in, especially if your faith so far has been built upon not thinking so much.
I think there are hard times coming. These are already hard times now, but they will get harder. There's a reason that only half of the virgins made it into the wedding.
That is not a happy thought, but what is a happy thought is that there is a plan. There is work in the spirit world, there is the Millennium for some things to be made up, and eternity for the rest. There is the Atonement, not just for forgiveness, and physical healing, but also emotional spiritual healing.
There can be legitimate questions about how to deal with any particular policy. Are there times when more needs to be said? For now, one thing I specifically want to be aware of is that there are people who are really hurt by this, and I want to be supportive of them. I am still going to church. I am still doing family history. I want to go to the temple Thursday. I will also correct anyone who says something really stupid.
It can be frustrating that sometimes we have such a hard time collectively finding the right balance, but I know my own struggles with doing so, and there are some ways in which I kind of have it together. Of course we mess up! I frustrate myself quite a bit too, but I remain amazed and grateful for the Lord's patience with us, and continued trust of us.
Sunday, November 1, 2015
Cascadia Megaquake - Our reference materials
For the next few weeks I will continue posting about earthquakes, but I will be primarily referring to two sources, both of which are available on the internet.
One is the Oregon Resilience Plan. This was referred to in the Unprepared special, and is a comprehensive study of what the state needs to be prepared for a megaquake, so has been used for making suggestions to the legislature. This is a very valuable resource for collective action:
http://www.oregon.gov/OMD/OEM/osspac/docs/Oregon_Resilience_Plan_Final.pdf
The other is the Unprepared page:
http://www.opb.org/news/series/unprepared/
This focuses more on individual preparedness.
I am a little disappointed that I am not finding a link to watch the special online. I still have it on my DVR, but for anyone who missed it they should have a chance to go back.
Anyway, I will be going back and forth between the two. Both personal and collective preparedness are necessary. Either one alone would be insufficient.
Feel free to follow along, and I wouldn't mind hearing about your own efforts. We will all need to work together.
One is the Oregon Resilience Plan. This was referred to in the Unprepared special, and is a comprehensive study of what the state needs to be prepared for a megaquake, so has been used for making suggestions to the legislature. This is a very valuable resource for collective action:
http://www.oregon.gov/OMD/OEM/osspac/docs/Oregon_Resilience_Plan_Final.pdf
The other is the Unprepared page:
http://www.opb.org/news/series/unprepared/
This focuses more on individual preparedness.
I am a little disappointed that I am not finding a link to watch the special online. I still have it on my DVR, but for anyone who missed it they should have a chance to go back.
Anyway, I will be going back and forth between the two. Both personal and collective preparedness are necessary. Either one alone would be insufficient.
Feel free to follow along, and I wouldn't mind hearing about your own efforts. We will all need to work together.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)