Thanksgiving

I'm considering all that I am grateful for this year and I though a Blog Entry was appropriate, as I'm trying to post here more often:

• I'm grateful for my wonderful wife, and all her patience with my rantings / ravings / complaints. She is a unique spirit in my life and I can't / don't want to imagine my life without her guiding influence
• My kids are the best. I know that I'm biased and that others say the same, but my kids are the best. Makayla, Sam, and Benjamin teach me things each day.
• I've got a great family, Parents and Siblings that care for me and my family. Dealing with people on a daily basis all over the region makes me appreciate the things my family has done for me.
• I'm grateful for my Savior, Jesus Christ, who gave up all that he had to see me return to live with Heavenly Father.
• I'm grateful for my church and for the lessons in humility and dealing with others that I learn on a daily basis.
• I'd be remiss in failing to state how grateful I am for this country that allows me to worship as I see fit. I'm grateful for those individuals who were willing to stand up for independence and gave all they had for independence. I'm blessed to be able to voice my opinions without being concerned with someone arresting me.
• I'm grateful for Thanksgiving. It was established as a national holiday in the US beginning in 1941, under FDR.

Thank you all, and have a great Turkey Day

Sunday School

This past Sunday I was surprised to find that instead of the "Whole Armor of God" lesson, in which I was prepared to participate, the Teacher had pushed us up a week, to "Being Good Citizens" Here's the TEACHERS MANUAL

The Lesson dealt with Section 134 of the D&C, arguably one of my favorite sections of the Doctrine and Covenants. While I will not criticize the teaching of the section, I want to make particular emphasis on Verse 9, a great verse based largely on the Prophet's experience with religious leaders in his community putting the church at a disadvantage:

134:9 We do not believe it just to ^amingle religious influence with civil government, whereby one religious society is fostered and another proscribed in its spiritual privileges, and the individual rights of its members, as citizens, denied.

How amazing, progressive, and historically relevant is this simple phrasing that it is not good to mingle religious influence with civil government. So often the Saints were at the short-end of the stick in New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Missouri, and Illinois because religious leaders spoke inflammatory words from the pulpit that stirred up the masses aided by the governmental leaders.

As members of the church we should be actively and anxiously engaged in protecting the rights of minorities and common man. We should realize how precious our liberties are as they were stripped from us for so long in the early days of the restoration. We should cherish those liberties and find ways to empower others to enjoy the prosperity we enjoy.

Great Article about Mormon Missionaries in Chicago

This article was forwarded to me several months ago, and I neglected to post it due to the craziness that was my life this past summer as we welcomed Benjamin into our family. I found it an interesting outsiders' view of Sister Missionaries in Chicago.

HERE:

I had the opportunity, 2 years ago, to attend a lecture at Princeton University discussing Mormons and Politics. While there I had the pleasure to listen to a Guest lecturer from Harvard discussing, in particular that day, the Presidential Bid of Mitt Romney.

My father forwarded this story on to me a couple of days ago, and I enjoyed it.

HERE

While I do not regularly follow the Meridian Magazine, it seems like it was an interesting commentary.

Immigration

I've been thinking the past couple of weeks about Immigration. I've struggled to put my thoughts into a cohesive and convincing whole as I've examined the various angles and elements of the public discussion and I believe that I can put words to "Paper" as it were...

Several years ago, an individual I know was complaining about illegal immigrants to this country. When I asked if he was Native American, his response was, "But my family immigrated legally." That Answer has gnawed at my thoughts on the subject since I heard it then and I've heard it several times after that. I thought I'd look into the Legal history of Immigration and study it from that angle. Here's what I found...

• 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act Restricted Chinese migrants alone and was a response to racisim and anxiety about cheap labor. This sounds familiar...
• 1898 US vs. Wong Kim Ark (Supreme Court Case) decided that children born in the united states, under Constitutional Amendment 14, are citizens of the US with all appropriate rights, privileges, and responsibilities.
• 1921 Emergency Quota Act was established to set up quotas from countries set at 3% of the US Census counts of ethnic groups. This was originally set up in fear of the Communisists as the Bolshevik revolution had just happened a couple of years earlier. This resulted in a substantial increase in illegal immigration as many Europeans migrated to Canada, where there was no quota and quietly slipped into the US. Renewed and codified in 1924
  
• 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act set new quotas for aliens with skills needed in the US as the Cold War was in full swing and specific skillsets were required. Provided first loophole for National Security
• 1965. The INA Amendments repealed the quota system, set up a Visa system for family reunification and skillsets. Set up quotas for regions of the world
• Over the intervening years several adjustments have been applied including amnesty in 1986 and increased responsability of employers to police their workforce.

As I looked into the history of the issue two thoughts kept coming accross. First, response to Illegal immigration often has the appearance of thinly veiled racisim or regionalism. We're not alone in this regard. For example, in areas of Latin America in the 1920s attempts were made to Whiten the population by appealing to Northern and Western European immigrants through incentives, land gifts, and quasi autonomy. Social Darwinism drove this effort through many countries in Latin America especially Argentina, Brazil, and Venezuela.

Many of the Quotas set up over our history have been set up to exclude a specific type of immigrant, once it was chinese, then Eastern European, and now Central American.

What Disturbs me most about this particular issue is the Hypocritical nature of the argument. The fact is, that if the immigration laws of today were in effect in the 18th and 19th Century many of us "Citizens" would not be here or we'd be classified as Illegal Immigrants. I wonder if the Native Americans considered the first European Settlers as Illegals? We know that this land was set up by a loving heavenly father for the purpose of restoring the Gospel. It was set up as a land of freedom, a land where ideally difference could be tolerated.

The same arguments that are being made about Illegal immigrants today are the arguments that were made about Chinese, European, African American, Indian, and Hispanic. The truth is that throughout history these immigrants have taken the jobs that more established immigrants have rejected.

I appreciate that I do not know everything about this subject and I am not sure what the ultimate solution should be. I believe however that the status quo is unacceptable and that a path to citizenship must be created. This Xenophobia of the American electorate must be overcome as well.

Big Love not Sharing the Love

I confess this up front, I've never watched an Episode of Big Love on HBO. I was unaware of the events surrounding the upcoming Episode of the Television Series until this morning reading a blog post. I found the Church's response to the event very interesting and enlightened.

The Response can be Found HERE

A Couple of Observations of the Response:

• The effort to connect with past public facinations were interesting
• I was unaware of the meeting between the creators of the series and the leaders of the Church.
• Nowhere in the article does it cite first-hand criticism of the show, rather it states "Internet References."  Very Classy way of telling the public that We're a "G" Rated Church
• The Church is not organizing a Boycott.  This shows that the church picks its fights carefully and with much prayer.
• The Connection to the Life of Christ rang true.  Christ did teach us a better way.  I've often thought that my life would be more rewarding if I could just "Turn the Other Cheek" or follow the other advice of Christ in my life.
• The Quote, "...with a global membership of thirteen and a half million there is no need to feel defensive when the Church is moving forward so rapidly."
• I loved the reference to Romney's Candidacy.  Its interesting to see the Church opine on the comments of Romney's fellow Republicans.
• I liked the Ending Quote:
• If the Church allowed critics and opponents to choose the ground on which its battles are fought, it would risk being distracted from the focus and mission it has pursued successfully for nearly 180 years. Instead, the Church itself will determine its own course as it continues to preach the restored gospel of Jesus Christ throughout the world.
  

Observations on the Inauguration of Barrack Obama

I find it interesting to view that both President Uchtdorf and Elder Ballard were in attendance at the Inauguration of Barrack Obama and from the photos seem to have been given somewhat prime seating as VIPs.

It appears that we've finally moved past the stage when we're saying "Anyone who is not with me is against me" and moving into the realm of possibility where together we're stronger than either of us alone.

The closing of Guantanamo Bay Cuba I view as a decision that should have been made years ago. We can't proclaim ourselves a free nation, the "Beacon" of Democracy while supporting such barbaric imprisonment of other human beings. Even if they are "Enemy Combatants" don't we, as Enlightened, Democratic torchbearers have the responsability to show the correct way, not the fearful way.

I'm hoping that we'll continue down this better path. Winning the "War on Terror" by becoming more barbaric than our enemy is not the Democrat or the Christian way to approach the problems we seek. In the Book of Mormon when Mormon declined the role of leadership of the Army it was because the soldiers had become as bad, if not worse than the Lamanites they were fighting. Hopefully we can avoid that fate.