Buddha comes out of the closet

Mormons are a strange breed. When it comes for fighting for other peoples' rights like the right of an innocent child to be born or the right to freedom of conscience, they will put up their time, talents, and money to support the cause. But when it comes to standing against anti-Mormon prejudice and discrimination they are milquetoast. The gay movements' vandalism, intimidation, and character assassination have been met with this mild response from the church, "People of faith have been intimidated for simply exercising their democratic rights. These are not actions that are worthy of the democratic ideals of our nation....some of what we have seen since Californians voted to pass Proposition 8 has been deeply disappointing. We call upon those who have honest disagreements on this issue to urge restraint upon the extreme actions of a few that are further polarizing our communities and urge them to act in a spirit of mutual respect and civility towards each other." Those bad, bad Mormons! Aren't they just filled with hate?

Thank goodness there are those freedom-loving individuals who are willing to stand up and expose the hatred and bigotry. Thanks to Dennis Prager, Jewish rabbi and talk show host, who stood up and said "Today I am a Mormon". Thanks to the editors of the National Review who said here 

"In truth, Mormons are a target of convenience in the opening salvo of what is sure to be a full-scale assault on much of America’s religious infrastructure, which gay activists perceive as a barrier to their aspirations. Among religious groups, Mormons are not the biggest obstacle to same-sex marriage — not by a long shot. But they are an easy target. Anti-Mormon bigotry is unfortunately common, and gay-rights activists are cynically exploiting that fact....They’ve already burned the Book of Mormon. The First Amendment is next." 

Pastor Jim Garlow of Skyline Church in La Mesa, California responded in a multi-pronged defense of the Mormons including this, "I put out an email to 7,200 pastors on Friday - to speak boldly affirming the Mormons for their role, and to get their congregations to speak out in defense of the Mormons."  Thank you Pastor Garlow.

The battle against hatred and bigotry against the Mormons is a battle that must be fought by the evangelicals, and the Catholics, and the Jews for it is their battle. It is a battle against, as the National Review put it, "Legislating immorality". It is a battle for the right to be free to believe in one's own religious faith of whatever persuasion. It is a battle that should be fought by every voice in talk radio and on the Internet because that's where the gun will be aimed next. The "fairness doctrine" will be invoked to be sure that only "approved" doctrine will be allowed. Political correctness will be our way of life. 1984 is late in coming, but Big Brother still is ready to watch all of us.

P.S.  thanks to Kathryn Jean Lopez.

Why I like Sarah Palin

re: Emily's comment "I don't know a ton about Palin but I'd love you to post a blog about why you think a woman with limited gov't experience, young children at home, and a less than stellar academic background would make a good president or V.P. There are some things I really like about her but I'd love to hear your thoughts."

All the talking points you have quoted can be turned into positives as far as I am concerned: 1) Limited government experience; the experience she does have is good -- mayor & governor, executive positions requiring ability to make decisions. The non-experience in Washington is a good thing. Many who have gone to Washington have been corrupted by the power and blindfolded by the inside-the-beltway mentality, losing touch with us citizens. Besides, versus Obama (2 years Senator, state legislator and community organizer) or Biden (many years of making the wrong decisions in Washington), her experience is outstanding. 2) Having young children at home; when did having a family become a negative in American politics? Abraham Lincoln had young children at home. Or is the question raised because she is a woman with young children at home? Are Barack's two young girls a problem? I would be embarrassed to be a women and raise this issue. 3) Academics; Does George Bush's Ivy League MBA impress you? In many cases an impressive academic record is simply a sign of radical indoctrination, as in the case of the Democratic nominee.

Frankly, the things that impress me most about Sarah Palin are not her so-called "Maverick" qualities, but her solid, conservative life and positions. I am pleased with her choices for life and liberty. I feel good that she has skepticism about man-caused global warming. I know that she supports a child's right to be born, even if not perfect. I think she is more likely to support letting keep what we have earned rather than taking from some groups to give to others.

I heard a prophet today. He talked about protecting our way of life by supporting Arizona's marriage amendment. Then he told a story about his family which I took as a parable. He was talking about listening to the Spirit.

A family member came to him for advise. A man had offered to buy the family farm. He was to pay with a cashiers' check. Everything on its face appeared to be on the up and up. But the family member didn't "feel" right about it. What should he do. The prophet told him to ask the man for references. He told his kinsman that if there was something wrong the man would get angry if he was asked for references. Sure enough, the meeting was held, the cashiers' check was offered in exchange for the land, and the man was asked for references. The man responded with anger over being asked. The kinsman canceled the transaction.

I think we have a candidate before us making us an offer of prosperity for everyone. All we have to give up is our way of life; our right to keep what we have earned, courts that will enforce the laws rather than be empathetic to groups, security in the face of evil forces (we have to believe that terrorists and radicals will respond to smooth talk while we reduce our defense capability), and even the protection of a constitution that was written to preserve our freedoms. Our other choice is not for a white knight who will lead us in pure, conservative principals, but instead a man who, at least, has courageously fought for his country, has supported the right to life whenever he has had a chance to vote for it, and talks about cutting the cost of government. And one other thing -- he does not get angry when we ask about his references. He does not try to hide who he really is.

A Powerful Endorsement

I guess it's too obvious, but I'm supporting John McCain, or maybe I should say, like Glenn Beck, that I am endorsing Sarah Palin. Then we could actually hope that McCain gets elected and then impeached by the Democrats.

To Emily

I have to say a few things of a political nature. I am definitely on the side of those who believe that if it is immoral for an individual, it is wrong for a government (which is after all, individuals acting together). Ergo, taking money from some people and giving it to other people is wrong, no matter how "virtuous" the cause. Because the government produces nothing, anything it gives to fulfill a so-called "right" like food, or healthcare must be taxed (taken by force) from some and given to others. There are some things that only government can do such as national defense and those things are outlined very well by the founders in the original meaning of the constitution.

There are certain moral issues that require the attention of the electorate, particularly and more especially because of actions by activist courts. Abortion was handled individually (and variously) by the states until Roe v. Wade. Not addressed by the constitution it was forced into a national issue by the Supreme Court. Localities and states are no longer allowed to set their own moral standards on this sensitive issue. The same thing is happening with same-sex marriage. Standards held for millenia in multiple jurisdictions are being overturned under pressure from special interests by the state courts. Constitutional provisions which make contracts (such as marriage) legal in one state legal in all the states make the changes affected in Massachussetts or California valid throughout the Union. This is outside of the moral and practical reasons for supporting the maintenance of man/woman marriage.
Because Arizona has this issue on the ballot this year I am going to point out a few reasons to support keeping the status quo, i.e. marriage is between a man and a woman. If same sex marriage is legalized it may be impossible for citizens to maintain their religious beliefs in public. Schools would be enjoined from teaching that male-female marriages are superior to same-sex because both would be legal. Parents would not be able to object to their children being taught that way because it would be the law of the land. There could be no preference given to mixed gender marriages in adoption.
Churches may be prohibited from restricting marriages held in the buildings to only heterosexual marriages. This has already happened in Massachussetts where the tax exempt status of a church was threatened by its' refusal to allow a same-sex wedding on its' grounds. "If same-sex marriages are recognized as the law of the land, it will be difficult for any church to defend its right of recognizing another standard." (Janice Shaw Crouse)
Proponents of the same-sex marriage issue are using deceptive techniques to fight the ballot issue. Their ad claims that Arizonans have already voted on this issue, but they know that the intrusion of the courts in other states has made a constitutional amendment the only effective way to maintain heterosexual marriage as the standard. In fact, either an amendment to the US constitution or amendments to each state constitution is the only way for the religious rights of all citizens to be protected from zealous same-sex marriage proponents.

Mexico

I'm not sure how guilty I should feel. I had a business trip this past week to New Mexico. It took me to the El Paso Airport and Elder Mark Brimley is just across the border in Juarez. Oh well, I drove across and found his home. Elder Matamoros opened the door. They were home that morning because it is their planning day and they spend about 3 hours making plans for next week. I took him a coat for the winter and got a few pictures and left. His companion was great. Mark rattled off Spanish like a native. Their place looked like a typical missionary apartment. Mark is very involved in the work and concerned about the progress in their ward. He told me they have seen things he hasn't told us about and I made him promise not to tell his mom.

All in all, I really loved driving around Juarez. I found the temple, but I missed the only session that day until 7 PM. I ate at a litte burrito/torta cafe and made my way around speaking a little spanish. The people I talked with were very nice.

View Larger Map'>Here is a map. Mark's place is close to the intersection of Juan Gabriel & Zaragosa

Trig

Of all the exciting things about the choice of Sarah Palin as Vice-Presidential nominee, perhaps the most remarkable is the light thrown on little Trig.  There he is, a bright, beautiful, innocent child born with an extra chromosome.  That "defect" is his protection from this evil world.  One that will keep him innocent throughout whatever time he may live on this earth.  God bless his mother and father who knew he was coming and welcomed him into their home.  And pity those poor women (and men) who chose, after learning through amnioscentisis of the possibility of Down's syndrome, to stop the life of an innocent spirit, and prevent needed experience for him (or her) and his parents.  And pity all those who chose for even sillier reasons to stop a life before it has a chance.

http://townhall.com/columnists/MichaelGerson/2008/09/10/the_importance_of_trig_being?page=1

Added September 13 from Hugh Hewitt.  In a letter from a pediatriacian:

If you have a minute I would like tell you a little story. For whatever reason, I had a fair number of parents with Downs children who would ask me to anesthetize their children, one in particular is still deep in my memory: a little darling and sweet little Downs boy (I can't remember the age) was anesthetized by me for a minor surgical procedure everything went very well and after taking to the PACU (post-anesthesia care unit) I went to speak the parents. After all the question were answered, the mother asked if there was any way his older brother could see him. He had purposely come from college to see his brother and had to go back. (At the time parents or family members were not allowed to go into PACU. I went back to the all powerful and wonderful nurses, and to make a long story shorter, the brother was allowed to come in. As the nurses and I looked back there was big brother on the stretcher with little brother in his arms. No more pain medication was needed for a child that was now comforted by the love of his brother. It made our day, For those of us who may not think Downs are special think again.All children are special. Children with disabilities are remarkably so, and their parents are greatly admired by all decent Americans.

Article 6 Still Under Attack

This comment was posted in the Article 6 blog. Go there sometime.

I would guess that you are far to confident and your memories are way too short if you think you are finished commenting on events. Although much of your focus has been on the Romney campaign, as you have mentioned many times, the MSM and the liberal left (sorry about the redundancy) are locked into identity politics and are glad to continue to tie evangelicals (and any sincere Christian religionists) to the nearest backward redneck. As Andrea Mitchell pointed out, to paraphrase, Hillary supporters will not be drawn to Sarah Palin, except the uneducated. The bigots will call it "flip-flops", they will claim hypocrisy (see, abstinence education doesn't work), they will continue to expose a young girl and her family to ridicule to help preserve the "right of privacy", they will claim that we want to "force our values" on them, and that anyone who can believe (insert any miraculous or spiritual event here) can't be trusted to run the country. No, my friends, the loss of the Mormon candidate will not stop your work. The lesson to, hopefully, come out of this campaign will be that all believers in Christ and/or Judeo-Christian values (even when held by other religionists) need to stand up together for our country and those values. Buddha for Mitt