Departing from my recent, more political, posts to one of greater importance, I want to take the opportunity to wish everyone (the 2 or 3 of you that read my blog, anyway) a Happy Easter. Easter is my favorite holiday because of what it celebrates; that Jesus Christ suffered, died and was resurrected that I may be forgiven of my sins and return to live with my Heavenly Father again. I bear testimony that He Lives and that He is the Son of God.
The video below contains testimonies of the savior borne by some of His modern apostles - living witnesses of Christ's divinity. I am guessing these are excerpts from General Conference addresses. General Conference is a biannual conference in which LDS Church leaders address the Saints world-wide. They occur every April and October. I'm excited to get to watch this weekend.
He does live and He loves us. Happy Easter!
Signing of the Declaration of Independence
Wednesday, March 31, 2010
Friday, March 26, 2010
Somtimes I Wonder...
... if they're trying to bring about a collapse on purpose. The CBO estimates that, under the President's current budget, the Federal debt will be 90% of GDP by 2020. They have taken the worst of the Bush Administration and quadrupled down. Our county will be hard pressed to survive under such crushing debt. Eventually our creditors will call it in, or else they will control us. It has also been reported that the Social Security payout will exceed what is brought in this year - six years earlier than expected. Medicare is broke. Medicaid is broke. And we just keep piling on. We are in dire need of national leaders who are serious about getting our house in order. It's just scary.
Thursday, March 25, 2010
With friends like these...
You can tell a lot about someone (and some legislation) by the friends they have.
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
From the Donkey's Mouth
Representative John Dingell ((s)D-Mich) explains the real reason for "health care reform" here.
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
On Glen Beck
I recently came across a post on a friend's facebook page dealing with Glen Beck and his recent statements concerning churches that teach "social justice." My friend stated that Glen Beck was "embarrassing [his] faith." For those who may not know Glen Beck is a Mormon (he converted as an adult). I don't like bogging down friends facebook pages with arguments, so I am venting here - both about the substance of the statement and the 30+ comments that followed the post.
First, I would like to point out that, while I do not agree with everything Glen Beck says, I am not embarrassed to say that he is a Mormon. I think he is right about a lot of things. My friend's post linked to an article by someone claiming to be a Mormon who wanted to be sure that everyone knew that Glen Beck didn't speak for her or the "Mormons she knows." Of course he doesn't. Glen Beck speaks for Glen Beck. He doesn't speak for me and I agree with him. He doesn't speak for all Mormons any more than Nancy Pelosi speaks for all Catholics, clearly. (As long as its apparently in vogue to distance oneself from others of his faith, I want to be clear that Harry Reid does not speak for me or most Mormons I know).
People attacking Glen Beck for his "social justice" comment, use, among other arguments, the fact that Christian churches - including the LDS Church - teach the importance of caring for the poor. Mr. Beck was not decrying these teachings. I've heard him embrace and encourage them. What Beck warns against are churches that teach that the government should force charity on the people and forcibly redistribute wealth has it deems proper.
The comments on my friends post included arguments over whether such "social justice" teaching was supported by Christian teaching - particularly that of the LDS Church. I happen to think that it is not and comparisons to the Law of Consecration, which was attempted by the early Church and which the Church believes will someday be lived by the Saints, are fallacious. However, I think that there can be reasonable disagreement on this subject.
What bothered me the most about the comments on my friend's post was the vitriol and arrogance exhibited by so-called Saints on the enlightened left. One poster in particular arrogantly denounced the arrogance of other posters and scolded someone for claiming to know what the "left" believes, while at the same time informing those of us on the right what we believe. This is one thing that bothers me about a lot of political discussion - the need for some people to immediately descend into "jerkdom" and hypocrisy. Examples: the same people who claim to be for free speech would silence people like Glen Beck (or Ann Coulter); the same people who call Glen Beck a hatemonger are the first to call him and others "idiots" or "crazy." I could go on, but it's late. I feel better, having vented. I just wish that people could stick to the arguments, and civilly, rather than immediately becoming abusive. A clear indication that your position is without merit is that you have no arguments but red herrings and ad hominem attacks.
First, I would like to point out that, while I do not agree with everything Glen Beck says, I am not embarrassed to say that he is a Mormon. I think he is right about a lot of things. My friend's post linked to an article by someone claiming to be a Mormon who wanted to be sure that everyone knew that Glen Beck didn't speak for her or the "Mormons she knows." Of course he doesn't. Glen Beck speaks for Glen Beck. He doesn't speak for me and I agree with him. He doesn't speak for all Mormons any more than Nancy Pelosi speaks for all Catholics, clearly. (As long as its apparently in vogue to distance oneself from others of his faith, I want to be clear that Harry Reid does not speak for me or most Mormons I know).
People attacking Glen Beck for his "social justice" comment, use, among other arguments, the fact that Christian churches - including the LDS Church - teach the importance of caring for the poor. Mr. Beck was not decrying these teachings. I've heard him embrace and encourage them. What Beck warns against are churches that teach that the government should force charity on the people and forcibly redistribute wealth has it deems proper.
The comments on my friends post included arguments over whether such "social justice" teaching was supported by Christian teaching - particularly that of the LDS Church. I happen to think that it is not and comparisons to the Law of Consecration, which was attempted by the early Church and which the Church believes will someday be lived by the Saints, are fallacious. However, I think that there can be reasonable disagreement on this subject.
What bothered me the most about the comments on my friend's post was the vitriol and arrogance exhibited by so-called Saints on the enlightened left. One poster in particular arrogantly denounced the arrogance of other posters and scolded someone for claiming to know what the "left" believes, while at the same time informing those of us on the right what we believe. This is one thing that bothers me about a lot of political discussion - the need for some people to immediately descend into "jerkdom" and hypocrisy. Examples: the same people who claim to be for free speech would silence people like Glen Beck (or Ann Coulter); the same people who call Glen Beck a hatemonger are the first to call him and others "idiots" or "crazy." I could go on, but it's late. I feel better, having vented. I just wish that people could stick to the arguments, and civilly, rather than immediately becoming abusive. A clear indication that your position is without merit is that you have no arguments but red herrings and ad hominem attacks.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)