Status update – 314

Now that I have finished reconciling my political and religious beliefs, and there was mention of the Apocalypse, I was going to do some follow-up on that which would be pretty cool—even if maybe a little scary and weird. I think I will still do that, but right now I just need to go over my life and what’s happening in it. Maybe I need to vent a bit.

None of the jobs I am applying for are working out. It’s a rough market of course, and the hard part is in most cases you don’t even hear back. I have gotten three signs of possible interest, but two turned out to be a little shady, and the one found out my wage history and didn’t want to waste my time anymore. I might have pressed harder, but it had come out that even though they called the job customer service, sales are a strong component, and you are really supposed to try and go for the add-on sales on every single call. I have a negative capacity for sales. Knowing I need to ask people for money makes me physically ill. So, pressing to take a wage I could not live on at a job that would make me sick didn’t seem like the thing to do, though I did think about it. After all, the money concerns are strong, and they have been joined by sick pets, car problems, and layoff concerns for other family members.

On the screenwriting side, I have three screenplays done. I feel like I come up with stupid titles, but they are Jade Mask, Between the Lines, and Hungry. I wasn’t really sure what to do in terms of marketing, because most production companies won’t take anything unless it is through an agent or an entertainment lawyer, and getting an agent with no track record used to be impossible. I thought maybe if I could get some screen treatments for other ideas set up, and called agencies with three completed scripts and six treatments, at least a few would have to take me seriously. I didn’t know how to do a screen treatment though, and I felt like I should be doing networking. So, I went through LDS Linkups and sent a message to almost every single person with film mentioned in their occupation.

I got a few helpful responses, and some less so, but one common thread was that three screenplays was not a bad start for finding an agent. Currently screen treatments are running at around thirty pages, and I had to put that idea on hold because I can’t justify spending the time to write that out when I could actually be working on a script. Well, if a potential buyer specifically requested it, yes, but otherwise no. So, a few days ago I printed out the list of agencies on the WGA site, and started calling.

It’s a horrible process. The third most common response is that they don’t really take literary clients. When I’m done I’ll send a list of those to the WGA, but one of the offices said they had told the WGA to take their information down already.

The second most common response is that we are not taking new clients, or at least not this year, but the most common response is that we only take referrals. (There was one very complicated one where they are not taking any new pitches, or literary clients, until after the New Year except by referral.) Some have machines, but at this point I cannot leave messages. Whether it would be a callback for the express purpose of rejecting me, or no callback because they are completely ignoring me, I am just not up to it right now.

On the plus side, when every answer is negative, you can make pretty fast progress. I only have about 64 calls left. The down side is that all of those rejections wear a girl down. (Also, I kind of think it’s silly to only look at referrals. For an actor it might make sense, but any agent worth his salt should be able to read a script and see if it’s any good and know if it’s marketable. I suppose it is to save the work of going through lots of scripts that aren’t any good, but isn’t anyone afraid of missing the next big thing?)

It may sound like an exercise in futility, but I guess I consider it to be dues paying. You don’t know what will come through so you need to try everything. I do have a few web sites I can check, and one of the LDS linkup guys and his brothers may film some of my stuff. There wouldn’t be any money in it necessarily, but it could provide some exposure.

Of course, I have come up with a secondary problem, which is that I find that even if I got an offer, I don’t think I could sell Hungry. All along it has been one that I thought I would film independently, because I love it too much to let someone else have it. It is the third one I’ve written, but it is an idea I have been working on since I was fourteen, and it has changed a lot since then, but it is still really a part of me. I thought I had changed my mind, because really it is very marketable and I have no idea when I would be ready to make a film, but as I have worked on it and crafted it, I know I can’t.

What makes that worse is that in my always thinking I would film it myself, I always thought Mitch would be a part of it. At first I thought he would be the vampire, and then I thought he would be the hero, and honestly, he could do either, but still, he was always in it, and so I miss him more as I am working on it, and I have to be honest with myself. I am still in love with him, without any logic or reason. I still think all I need is one reciprocal relationship to get me over him, but I don’t even know what those look like.

That is another point right there. Every year I find myself at the end of the year alone, and somehow that seems to be worse around the holidays. However, as we reach the New Year I always start feeling a little bit of hope and optimism and think, well, maybe next year there will be someone. This year, not only is there still not anyone, but I am unemployed. And I thought just being lonely was bad!

So today I was going to call through L on the agent list, and polish some scenes, and look for some conventional jobs as well, but when I woke up I heard my mother crying, and talking in Italian, and although I did not want to believe it I knew that it meant that my uncle Paolo had not recovered from his heart attack, and that he was gone, and I don’t know how productive I’m going to be today. I’m just a little down.

I’m not depressed. I remember what that was like. I wanted to die, and I wanted to die not just because of how much I hurt but because I could not believe that things would ever get any better. I know things will get better here. I will find a job, or I will sell a screenplay (or both), or I will finally, after making it into their contestant database three times, finally get called to go on Jeopardy. Something good will happen financially.

With my uncle, that one’s harder, but I am so glad Mom and I went in May. More than that, I am grateful for the Resurrection, and that I know he is okay. I don’t even know how I would feel for that.

So, my mental soundtrack right now is “I’m Not Okay” (My Chemical Romance, old school version), but really, I am okay. More accurately, I know that I will be okay and that keeps me from being completely un-okay now.

Why I am not a Republican, Part 3 – 316

I really think I can finish this today. I hope I’m not being too ambitious. The question is whether I can get gun control, environmental issues, and the apocalypse all together.

Gun control and supply side economics were the two issues that really caused me to register as a Democrat back when I turned 18. We’ve already covered my economic feelings, and my feelings on guns haven’t really changed either. Naturally, I don’t favor a total ban on guns, but I can’t help but see that a gun makes killing really easy. You don’t need to get particularly close to the person, there are different levels of skill but you don’t need to be particularly skilled, and it can all be over very quickly. Those seem like good reasons to have some rules and regulations.

People use the slippery slope argument against this—that if you ban plastic guns and armor-piercing bullets now then blink and the government will be seizing all of your guns. If you try to argue that no, it is possible to have different gradations and levels, they make an argument that people are stupid. Okay, I admit I can see this, and there is plenty of evidence for it. Regardless, the process of legislation is slow, and somewhat deliberate, and even after a law passes it needs to meet constitutional requirements, and so yes, I really believe it is possible that we can find a middle ground here. Am I overly optimistic? Perhaps, but we do have laws and regulations about cars, and lots of people still drive.

Now, the reason that I put control with constitutional concerns and the environment is that I believe a lot of the fundamentalists who want to hang on to their guns feel this is necessary because of end of the world scenarios where they will need to fight off marauders intent on stealing their food storage. This goes along with the other things because many people who don’t worry about the environment base that on the fact that the whole thing is going to burn up anyway.

I can see that, and remembering that is actually how I keep from despairing about how bad things are getting, but I have always felt that you should not be a part of the problem. Consider Mormon 8:31: “Yea, it shall come in a day when there shall be great pollutions upon the face of the earth; there shall be murders, and robbing, and lying, and deceivings, and whoredoms, and all manner of abominations…”

It certainly isn’t an invitation to participate in the whoredoms, and He will clean those up too. Why should we take a casual approach to the sanctity of Earth? Destroying the beauty and the variety is really an ungrateful approach to what we have been given. I would call it grossly ungrateful and irreverent.

People get weird and stupid about this too. There was some controversy several months ago because some school wanted to show An Inconvenient Truth in their science classes. Several parents objected to the political nature of it (telling me they have not seen the movie, because it was not strongly political), others objected to the fuzzy science of global warming, and one letter amazed me. His point was that the Bible says the earth will get warmer so it can burn, and maybe this is just the fulfilling of Biblical prophesy. Okay.

I think there are a few points to make here. One good thing to remember is that often prophesies are the way God knows things will be, and so tells the prophets. Yes, there are things that He makes happen, like sending a Savior or a flood, but sometimes it is us (back to those murders and abominations), so just because it was foretold doesn’t automatically make it fine. This is where I sometimes get fatalistic about causes, because there are some battles that I know we are not going to win, and I can bear that because the Second Coming will fix everything, but I’m not going to climb on the enemy bandwagon either. There are some things we can make better, and those are worth doing.

For example, there was a project suggested to put in windmills off the coast of Martha’s Vineyard. The property owners objected because it would ruin their view. (I know, windmills are so ugly!) Anyway, the interesting thing about this is that the area is largely fueled by coal, and that there is a really high juvenile asthma rate (high adult rates too, but it is worse for children, probably because their lungs are still developing). I know that making that conversion would not end the global warming crisis, but it wouldn’t hurt that and wouldn’t it be nice to get some kids off inhalers? And I certainly don’t want to be the person who decides that my view is more important than other people breathing clean air. (Because the people with the asthma are not the ones with coastal property. They are the ones living in the cities and near the coal plant.)

I won’t deny that bad times are coming, and that there is not a lot that can be done to prevent it, but I will still do whatever can be done to make things better. If one polar bear is saved, or one person doesn’t get murdered, it all comes down to the individual, really. Think about it, with Hurricane Katrina (which was related to global warming, but was greatly exacerbated by government problems before, during, and after), it isn’t really that 1,833 people died. It is that one person died, and that happened 1,833 times.

We all understand loss, but we don’t really grasp big numbers, so we go kind of numb to them. Frequently we get around this by focusing on a small part, like a firefighter carrying one child away in Oklahoma City—one child who died. With Mumbai, we focus on one child who was orphaned. It is the individual that matters, and so anything we do matters because it can affect an individual. It’s great to think globally, but it may be more valuable to think locally, if for no other reason than because your odds of success are better.

So, what about that white horse prophecy, where the constitution will hang by a thread and it will be up to the church members to save it? I haven’t really been able to establish its truthfulness. It’s certainly possible, and defending it even might require guns, but here is my question: Has there been anyone up until now who has done more damage to the Constitution than George W. Bush?

Think of the Bill of Rights, and how the Patriot Act has cut into it, with rights to speedy trial and rights against unreasonable search and seizure. How has privacy and the rule of law been damaged by warrantless wire-tapping.

Even if you decide to scrap the Bill of Rights (which is really the heart of America, and the values), and decide to just go with the Constitution itself (how the government will work), then think about the concentration and expansion of executive power, and the shifting around of the office of the Vice President so that Cheney will claim to be legislative one day and executive the next, basically so he can avoid answering for his actions. Think about the value of the checks and balances that were written into the government, and the implications of signing statements under this administration. Think about the politicization of the Justice Department. I’ve seen the signs, and I don’t think that Obama is the Anti-Christ, but if the role of the Beast will be filled by an American president, the Bush administration has presented a priceless gift. Great job guys.

So there is one area where I get really ticked off about this orthodoxy of Republican-good/Democrat-bad. Not just Democrat-bad, actually, but also that Democrat equals automatically unpatriotic. You seem to have confused love with enabling—this could be an issue in future relationships.

I’m not sure if I have really made it clear how all of this ties together for me, but let me put it this way. If I believed that it was correct and appropriate to try and hurry up the Second Coming by encouraging environmental degradation, government corruption, and societal collapse, I would vote Republican every single time.

Sex education – 314

Believe it or not, I have had strong theories about sex education for a long time, and the recent election had me thinking about the topic more. It’s not just the expression of barely suppressed crazy-eyed rage on McCain’s face during the third debate when Obama thought that we could all support using education to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies, but also Bristol Palin and 4parents.gov.

You might have already guessed that I would continue my pro-thought stance, but let’s combine it here with the old adage that knowledge is power. I feel empowerment is the key. Specifically it needs to be age-appropriate empowerment on how not to be exploited, and how to be healthy.

One thing that got me thinking was an episode of Law & Order SVU (Contagious). A young girl was abused, she was pressured to name her abuser but terrified into initially naming the wrong person (and ruining his life), because the real abuser had threatened to kill her. What occurred to me was that anyone who is telling you not to tell is really demonstrating that you have the power. He didn’t kill her—he got arrested. Now, I’m not saying that it would have been good for her to tell him, right after the threat, that she was going to tell, but yes, get to a safe place, and then tell.

That is something to let kids know, and it may actually be a more valuable lesson than specifically telling children about sexual abuse. It seems that when children are being molested, they know it is wrong, whether they have had that explained to them or not, and if you try to tell them what to look out for you can get them feeling weird about sitting on laps or hugs if you throw in too many euphemisms or go too much the other way. But yes, you can talk about things that hurt, and things that make you sad, and that those things should not be secret.

In terms of the mechanics of sex, that can probably wait until they are slightly older. The one sex talk I remember getting from my mother must have been when I was four, as I think I asked after I found out she was pregnant with my younger sisters. She gave me an analogy about seeds being planted that I took far too literally, but that’s probably okay. I later got the straight details from the book “Where Did I Come From?” that the girl next door had. I would have been between eight and ten, and this is an excellent book for that age.

As the older children start turning into young adolescents, they still need to know how to protect themselves, and that means far more than condoms. My thoughts here are largely influenced from when I first read about Neil Goldschmidt and the fourteen-year old girl. The media took flack for referring to it as an affair instead of sexual abuse, and I can see how that happened. At the time, I bet both Goldschmidt and the girl would have agreed that the term affair was more accurate than abuse. Regardless, it is abuse, and I doubt the abuser is completely blind to the lack of equality in the relationship—it’s probably one of the perks. What I remember learning then was how it destroys the victim. After effects generally include (among other things) alcoholism and employment problems, both of which had been issues for the victim. It may sound stupid to throw self-esteem issues in there, but you know, the self-respect of any teenage girl tends to be a little fragile, and one big issue with any abuse of children and adolescents is that they are still forming their world views, in terms of how they think things work, and what’s okay. You do more harm by abusing them than you can to an adult simply because of that.

Anyway, what occurred to me, as someone who had two teachers who later ran off with students (three if you count the girl’s soccer coach, but that was a former student, not current student), is that no one ever really told us that. Sure, you can think that getting involved with an old man would be gross, and yet there are teachers who are attractive, and students who are vulnerable, and obviously, the possibility is there. So maybe it is worthwhile to tell students that an adult or person in power who is interested in you is a pervert. This is not because you are not attractive, but because the job of adults is to be protective of the young, and this is exploitation. Because this is someone who will like being able to dominate you and control you, even if initially there is feigned interest in your thoughts and wants. And because the legacy of people who give into this is pain that you will be tempted to numb with substances, and an inability to achieve goals or even obtain minimal stability. Let the potential prey understand the predator so that it will be easier to resist.

Once you have the creepy molesters out of the way, there is still the issue of what information you can appropriately give teens about sex. Many people who are against sex education seem to feel that any mention of the topic will give the kids ideas, especially if you try and teach them how to avoid the risky things like catching diseases and getting pregnant, so let’s not mention the word and turn these docile innocents into raging bags of hormones. Except, if they have ever been out in the world at all, the ideas are there, and even if you have somehow kept them in a bubble of isolation, the hormones are still there. And that’s great, they should be. The hormones were put there by the same God who says that you will be happier if you don’t base your actions on your hormones. There is no real benefit to withholding that basic knowledge.

Most of my knowledge comes from tenth grade health class, where we watched many movies and read statistics about pregnancy and STDs (as well as drugs, smoking, drunk driving, and eating disorders). We did learn about the different types of birth control, and that might have even been back in junior high, though the memory is a little foggy. However, although that information is good, it is really not a sufficient education. Risks will not scare teens out of doing things, because all teenagers know that they are immortal and that stuff doesn’t really happen. They might use the birth control, but you can’t count on statistics sinking in. Those of us who were not engaging in risky behaviors were generally doing it for personal beliefs.

That being said, there are a lot of good reasons for waiting, and there are things you could say that might sink in. I don’t see that the average teenager is afraid of getting the clap (though there was an outbreak at one of the area schools my junior year), but they are afraid of rejection, and getting their feelings hurt, and a lot of emotional things that do end up getting tied in with sex. It turns out that many of my friends who got early starts did not particularly enjoy them, or feel good about them afterwards.

One of my earliest memories about this did not actually involve a friend. This was back in eighth or ninth grade, and back then my social group was still all good girls who were never going to do that (this changed over the next two years). Anyway, I was walking down the hall with one guy, and there was a girl, D, in front of us. Her boyfriend, J, came out from a room, and seeing her in front he gave her a swat on the rear, and she looked back in fake shock, and then he put his arm around her, and they walked off together. The guy I was with (let’s call him B) told me that J was just hanging out with D until she gave in, and then he would dump her. I remember seeing them about two weeks later, near each other but not together, and she shot him a look of pure hatred and I knew it had happened.

That is not an uncommon story. I wonder now if I should have tried to warn her. “Hey, do you like dating J? Don’t sleep with him,” but we weren’t friends and I don’t think that conversation could have gone well. Maybe the more shocking thing was that I don’t remember B thinking much about it one way or the other. He was a nice guy. Maybe it did bother him. More to the point, I know it bothered her, and it’s just a really crappy thing to like someone, and believe he likes you, trust him, give yourself to him, and then realize that you were just a chump, And I bet she didn’t have a good time that night either.

For real empowerment, there needs to be honesty. That means that you need to admit that sex feels good and there are strong natural cravings that at times may seem like they will drive you crazy (but they really won’t, and you will not explode). But admitting that allows you to be honest about what sex will not do. It will not make you feel loved when you are not loved. It certainly does not prove love. It will not make you popular, at least not in the way you would like.

Empowerment also means helping teens know how to feel loved, and satisfied, and to build good relationships, and not go with someone who does not respect you. (And, for girls at least, maybe everyone, it should probably always include some self-defense classes.)

This is embarrassing, but due to a relative who shall not be named, I get a little more exposure to 7th Heaven than I am really happy about (they seem a bit self-righteous for how much they lie, but maybe that’s just me). Anyway, as far as I can tell, two of the main characters have had premarital sex. The one had an STD scare that made him stop doing it, and the other got a girl he didn’t care about pregnant and lost the girl he really loved. I just think it’s a little dishonest. Lots of people experiment without having those things happen, and teens know this, and will be rightly skeptical. This will not win them over.

Also, since these discussions are generally about what schools will do (rather than churches or parents), well, a public government-financed school cannot tell teens that they should wait until they are married to have sex or it’s a sin. Parents can, but if they don’t explain why the kids may not listen to well. (And I am probably also strongly influenced by my belief that commandments are not arbitrary, but that there are good reasons for every one that relate to our happiness.) Anyway, calling it bad will probably not be effective when it sounds so fun.

However, I think there is something that can be said that will still be helpful. We can teach teens to have made the decision of when sex will be appropriate before they do it. Marriage is a great choice, but after completing college, or even after graduating high school, can be good goals. If they are not ready to decide that they want to put it off that far, they can think again in six months and review. Encourage them to think about what would be acceptable to them, in terms of where they are in their life, and how they feel about the person and the circumstances. Maybe they will want to set standards for how long they have been dating someone, or that it can never be in a car, or can never involve lying or alcohol. The point is, they will be coming up with a standard, other than simply being alone with someone (maybe a little bit buzzed) and the kissing feels good and there goes the hand and clarity of thought has just left the building. (And obviously, when you are having this discussion, you should also discuss the kinds of situations that make you forget smart choices you made and throw them over for foolish ones.)

This is really allowing the teen to take ownership of their life and sexuality, and this is scary, but they need to. One study a while back showed that promise rings and vows of chastity were only effective if the number of students participating was below a certain amount. The conclusion was that the teen needs to feel a certain amount of uniqueness to stick to abstinence. It seems more likely to me that maybe the issue is that when more students are participating, you might have some teens taking the pledge because of peer pressure, rather than a sincere belief in its value. That can be seen as a positive peer pressure, but if it doesn’t stick that might be one really great argument right there against abstinence-only education. Teach teens that they are valuable, and that they deserve to be respected, and how to maintain that.

It won’t be foolproof. I remained chaste (by choice) because of my religion, but there were kids of the same religion who did not, so that’s not a rule, and there were kids who weren’t religious who at least waited until after high school for reasons of their own.

I know it gets hard for some parents, because they don’t want their kids to have sex, but they did, and they feel like hypocrites. However, think about why you don’t want them to do it. Do you have some regrets? You can share that honestly. Please remember that honest communication will probably need to focus more on the motivations and emotions than on recounting the lurid details, or the conversation can quickly move south. But also remember that having open communication will be huge in terms of knowing what is going on in their lives. Some of the friends who made the worst choices had the most clueless parents, and I don’t think that was a coincidence. It wasn’t a lack of love, but whether it was due to fear, or preoccupation with other things, or a desire to be liked, they let things slip by that they should have seized upon.

Obviously, parents play an important part in making sure that their children feel loved, and know to treat others with respect, and have respect for them selves, and there should be a commitment to being educated about that. One thing I remember about The Five Love Languages was that he said when he had young clients with problems who did not feel loved, they always were loved—it just wasn’t getting through to them. Before I have children I will re-read it, and before I have teenage daughters I will re-read Reviving Ophelia, and before I have children starting school I will re-read Food Fight (the Brownell-Horgen one). I’m sure other books will join that list. Tell me your favorites.

Okay, so my mother did not teach me the mechanics of sex, and honestly, my older brother and sister got sex talks from Dad and they found them more traumatic than helpful. However, there were some things they did right. Dad got us going to church, and even after he stopped going, half of us kept going and that did make our lives better. My mother also has been good for me maintaining a healthy attitude about sex because she never tried to make us feel like it was bad or gross, but there was always that standard that it is something that is great for bringing a husband and wife closer together. No one in the family is a prude, but those of us who have chosen chastity don’t regret it.

I admit, not all of us did, and even with better more effective parents, that might still have been the case. Respectfully and honestly empowering teens will not completely eliminate teen sex. But you know what else won’t? Abstinence-only education.

Prayer of Thanksgiving – 318.5

In many ways, this year has not been the year that I planned on having, and it seems like many of the immediate things to be thankful for have a “but” attached, which I do not like. There is nonetheless a lot to be thankful for, and I wanted to express some of that in commemoration of the day.

Yes, I am unemployed, and that is scary. At the same time, I can’t really regret the loss of CDI, and we are getting by so far. I believe this period will eventually launch us in to something better. Also, we have a dog in the hospital right now, but we get her back tomorrow, and can hope that she will do better now. Other than those concerns, things are pretty good. So here are some of the things I am thankful for.

I am grateful for modern conveniences. We have soft mattresses, hot showers, and indoor plumbing. It would be lovely to have a dishwasher, but we can nonetheless wash the dishes and have them clean without building a fire or scouring them with sand. Having a computer means that I can write at a good pace, in a readable format that is easy to correct, without my hand cramping up. It’s much better than a typewriter.

I am grateful for my health, said the overweight diabetic whose blood sugar is becoming erratic without a trace of irony. For one thing, the way it is becoming erratic is that it is more likely to become low now, and that is easier to fix than a tendency to be high, and maybe means that I can slowly be weaned off some of these medicines that are designed to keep it low. In addition, I still have good mobility, and I am grateful to be able to walk and lift and reach and to not always be in pain. I am grateful to have the full use of my five senses. My eyesight is not great on its own, but modern optometry means that I do still get to see. I even have prescription sunglasses!

The dogs do worry us and cost us money, but they also provide unconditional love and amusement and warmth. The cat does not provide quite as much warmth, but she’s a lot cheaper to maintain and rarely worries us, so it works out.

I am thankful for my friends. I have some really good ones. Jennie goes back to third grade, and Karen and Ericka go back to seventh. I am especially lucky in that I did not maintain constant contact with Karen and Jennie, but I was able to find them again and reconnect, and I am glad to have them in my life. Now they have been joined by newer friends like Tara and Mollie and Jill, and that’s a good group of women. I am really thankful for Josh and Rachel, not only for pushing me to start this blog for about a year before I actually did it, but also for continually supporting me in keeping it up (even though I swear they said I should start one because I was so funny, and I don’t seem to get very funny most of the time).

This may sound cheesy, but I am grateful for Facebook. You can’t stay close to everyone whom you like or are interested in, but there are means to keep tabs on them, and that is great. And it’s free.

I’m grateful to be writing. I haven’t really posted updates about how that is going, but Monday I completed my third screenplay. It’s too short, incidentally, but this is the first time I have written in strict chronological order, and so I think as I edit I will see things that are missing that did not come up earlier. Regardless, I know how long I spent on the first one, and the second one was faster, and this one was faster yet. Sure, the extra spare time is a factor, but I am also getting more sure of myself and more skilled, and I am finding it very satisfying. Not a source of income yet, but I still have hope.

I am grateful for my church calling with emergency preparedness, in that I have a way to serve, and it is a calling that challenges me but that I am still good at. I loved teaching Sunday School, and I still like it when I get to sub for other teachers, but the truth is, it’s not hard for me. Emergency preparedness requires more of me, and that’s a good thing. And Maria and I got to take the CERT training this year!

I am grateful that there is so much beauty everywhere. Well, mainly in nature, but also in music, and sometimes in architecture and art. There are things that feed the soul, and you don’t have to look very hard to find them.

I am grateful to have been born in the Church. It makes my life so much better, and I hope I would have accepted it anyway, but it helped to have it early on, and to have at least some family members doing the same things. I see people who join on their own, and it is hard with no support and often they fall away, or they make it, but with some really lonely times. It is true that we have family members that are problematic, but that might just be families.

I am grateful to have served a mission, and gone to college, and to have had many of the work experiences I have had. I can see quite clearly at times how I could have made better choices and perhaps progressed at a faster rate. At the same time, I don’t know what I would have lost. There are people I have met along the way, and experiences I have had, that have been gifts. Sure, I could have been, like, married for twelve years already, with five kids, but then there might not be a Mollie and Tara and Jill in my life, and I might never have done emergency preparedness, and maybe I wouldn’t have gone to Australia. You really can’t know that, you just need to cherish what you do get.

I am grateful to have gone to Australia, and Italy, and other places in other years. I hope I get to go more places in the future. Barring a serious head injury or dementia, those memories are mine and they are good ones.

I am grateful for my family in Italy, and their warmth and love for me. I am grateful for second chances (and third and fourth and fifth chances—how ever many it takes, seriously).

Finally, I am grateful to be an American. We have been through some hard times, and collectively done some stupid things, but we have a new president on the way, and it happened without a military overthrow or civil war. Democracy can only be as good as it’s people, but it beats pretty much everything else.

Happy Thanksgiving to everyone. Hold on close to the ones you love.

Education – 316.5

I seem to be finding a lot of tangents as I go over my political leanings, but that is not too surprising for me. When I was thinking about the issues of charter schools and home schooling, I started thinking about intelligent design and things like that, and it sort of dovetailed with a recent controversy in Sherwood School District about whether or not Grendel should be allowed in the curriculum, so I am going to write about that.

Starting with Grendel, the curriculum for that particular class includes Beowulf, so having the same story told from two different angles makes a certain amount of sense, though I tend to hate those kinds of books. It has been done with several classic novels, and the re-imaginings tend to ruin the characters and end up more vulgar or more nihilistic or more ugly, if for no other reason than the new one is trying to provide some edge. (Parental permission was required, with alternative choices for students whose parents objected, but some people wanted it completely removed.)

In this case, there is graphic violence in the novel, but the controversy comes more from a passage where the monster confronts the queen, rejects female anatomy as ugly (with violent fantasizing) but ultimately lets her go because killing her would be as meaningless as not killing her, but not killing her would confuse the other humans.

So, will reading this corrupt teenagers? Possibly. There are ugly thoughts in it, but they come from someone alienated, and I doubt anything a monster says in a book will make teenage boys reject female anatomy, and the way it is written would probably not give girls a complex in this case. I didn’t see any thing from former students who had read it and what they thought, but that might be good to find out.

Honestly, I think what makes it more of a bad idea for teenagers is the general angst. “I understand them, but they don’t understand me. All the world is against me and no one else is like me.” (The author was very influenced by Sartre.) I can see a lot of teenagers relating to that, and it would not necessarily be the healthiest thing to validate. I read something recently about different age limits for books where if you don’t read by a certain time, it won’t have much of an impact on you. I don’t remember the ages, but the books were The Catcher in the Rye, A Confederacy of Dunces, and either something specific by Ayn Rand or her work in general. It is definitely true that there are some viewpoints that will sound less valid as you gain in experience and maturity. That being said, is elimination of these viewpoints the answer?

Honestly, I don’t know about the book. I have researched it some, but I haven’t read it. If my child was going to be in that class, I would try and make a point of reading it, but so far it sounds like it would be really annoying, and since I don’t need to read it, I’m not going to. I feel more comfortable saying that intelligent design should not be taught in science class.

I believe in the Creation. I don’t particularly believe in evolution, and there were times when that was kind of uncomfortable in science class. However, there are things that you know by faith, and they are the opposite of science, and therefore science class is not where they belong.

Studying the regular, largely accepted science can teach you a lot about how different features work well, and symbiotic relationships, and just how various processes work. On the other hand, will teaching a skeptic about intelligent design really lead to faith? Especially because they often get pretty stupid.

It’s amazing to me how strictly some people adhere to the six days of creation as six twenty-four hour periods. First of all, we get our twenty-four hour period from the period between one sunrise and another, and the lights in the firmament are not mentioned until the fourth day. Also, there are other verses that say a thousand years is as a day to God, indicating that our measurement and understanding of time is different than His. Finally, like the Bible is never figurative?

And really, how much do we know about the Creation? Could we do it right now? No, and that is fine. We will understand that later, but it is completely beside the point right now, when clearly we have still not adequately learned how to love each other.

That’s not to say that no one can have an explicit revelation of how it happened, but if they did, it would probably be something to keep personal. I sometimes get ideas of how specific things could work, and that is fine, but they could easily sound silly to someone else, and since they are not essential, I’m not going to worry about it too much.

My real concern is that often it seems the fundamentalists are having knee-jerk reactions against things that are bad. I am still pro-thought, so I am against the knee-jerk in general, but my experience has also been that my thoughts strengthen my faith. Yes, I start out believing, and coming from that viewpoint, but as I ponder things I find logic and beauty in them, and that reaffirms my faith in God. He is good. His plan is good. I can trust Him.
If we are afraid that questioning things is evil, are we saying that God can’t stand up to the questions?

One thing that has been interesting to me is that at several meetings where we have had area authorities they have opened the floor to questions. This strikes me as very brave and generous, but unfortunately people ask really stupid questions. The questions I have heard have usually seemed to be more about trying to make the asker look smart or justify their selves or settle a disagreement, instead of actually being a sincere question. However, there was one that was a sincere question that got asked of Elder Brinkerhoff, about organ donation. She had heard that the Church was against it, and I think she said that her father told her that if you donated your organs you would not get them back in the Resurrection.
It’s just mind-boggling to me that even if you did believe that selflessly making one last contribution to others at the end of your life was wrong, that you could actually thwart the Resurrection. It seems to show a lack of faith. I think it shows even less faith to believe that God cannot stand up to being questioned. No, scientific inquiry is not how people learn about Him, and grow in faith, but there is still inquiry even if the answers are coming to the heart.

My point is, this is why I sometimes think that fundamentalists or evangelicals or whatever you want to call them (and certainly including some Mormons) don’t seem to have a very high opinion of God. They shout down differing viewpoints, but shouting makes it impossible to hear the still small voice that would actually resolve the question.

I don’t completely despair though, because I see that people are often instinctively smarter than doctrines. Post-Nicaea, Catholic doctrine described a God without parts and passions, and technically the tenets of the Protestant sects still subscribe to that belief. However, some time ago there was an article that even though most churches will say this, most people will say that the first thing they want to do when they get to Heaven is to give God a hug. Their hearts know that He has a form, and can be hugged, and it is something they long for. I believe this is the light of Christ working within them.

False doctrine does get in the way, and maybe this is why so many people seem to believe their God is a bit of a jerk. I mean, if you really believe that unbaptized infants go straight to Hell, or residents of lands where they have never heard the Gospel and never had the chance to accept it, or if, like my old friend Lise you know Mormons who are good people and are tormented knowing that they will go straight to Hell, well, the God who ordained that would be hard to confide in. But He is so much better than that.

There was a guy in my ward in college that I couldn’t stand, who said that on his mission he would knock on people’s doors, and tell them that if they didn’t listen to him they were going to Hell. I’d like to think it was a joke, but I doubt it. He wasn’t funny. He thought he was clever for saying that, but he wasn’t doing the listeners or the Church any favors. First of all, the tone is combative, so that is leading into contention right there, making it hard for anyone to feel the Spirit. In addition, what he meant by going to Hell would not be the same thing that the other person would understand. Also, that their eternal salvation would rest upon letting this obnoxious, arrogant person into their house is patently untrue—therefore, there is no opportunity for the Spirit to confirm anything to them. It’s just not the way.

I know that everyone can know the truth of the Gospel, and I know that everyone will get a chance. That is wonderful, and amazing, and beautiful. It is also logical if you have any kind of a God worthy of the title, and we do. It is incredibly worthwhile to spread this knowledge. It will not be well spread by fighting, or Bible bashing, or visits to Creation Museums where the displays show human children playing with a Triceratops.

It can grow with sincere expressions of faith, where the person listening feels something in the heart, and then wants to hear more. Thinking about it can be good, and some people will get it wrong, because they will think only as a means of explaining it away, or maybe they will let negative thoughts drown it out, but they won’t listen any better to shouts and condescension. That’s just logical.

Why I am not a Republican, part 2 – 315.5

Weighing in on the moral issues aspect, it may be harder for me to stay coherent. These are the areas where I get angriest, because I find myself getting more and more frustrated with people on issues where technically we agree. I’ll try though.

Let’s take abortion. I believe it is wrong. That’s pretty straightforward. At the same time, I can’t support making it illegal. If it never had been legal I probably would not want that to change, but we’re here, and it’s been around, and I think there is some value to that.

When we were studying the Civil War, I remember Mr. Pitzer saying that the only issue that seemed to have the potential for a similar conflict was abortion, because of how emotional is. However, since the two sides were not split into separate geographic areas it was not likely that it would ever come to that. So, one reason that I could not favor anti-abortion legislation was the turmoil it would cause, with really ugly feelings coming out, and hatred brewing between neighbors. Also, it seemed like a silly area to focus on because I did not believe that we would ever even come close to overturning Roe versus Wade, so why stir up all of that anger for nothing? I guess now that the idea has come closer to reality, I have to take it a little more seriously.

I guess where I generally get most frustrated with “Christians” (including “Mormons”), is that they get so caught up in the judging that they forget the compassion. My scripture reading has given me the idea that the most important thing is charity, and that judging should actually be avoided. I do have charity for the unborn children, but they are sinless and I know God will take care of them. Perhaps we should focus loving the sinner.

That I know of, I know two women who have had abortions. Realistically, the number is probably a lot higher. For those two, I know that neither of them wanted an abortion. They hated getting that, but they did not feel like they could go through with the pregnancy. There was fear and shame and yes, they should not have gotten pregnant, and it both cases it should have been avoidable, but I still do not feel like I have a right to judge.
Again, in terms of things I found interesting about the third debate, I found a couple of things very interesting. One was McCain’s response to Obama saying that there are surely areas that we can all agree on, like supporting adoption and education, and the look I saw on McCain told me that he strongly disagreed with that (and I am going to write more about education later). The other thing that surprised me was that on the topic of the health of the mother (an exception clause was missing from one bill that Obama did not support), McCain said that people twist that to mean anything.

The only person I have ever heard twist the definition of the health of the mother was Senator Bill Napoli of South Dakota trying to justify new stricter laws that did not have an exception for rape. (The idea was that if the rape was brutal enough maybe an abortion could be allowed so that the mental stress wouldn’t kill her. I’m paraphrasing but I am not making it more twisted than it was because I don’t think I could.)

That’s actually another thing that concerns me. It used to be that any proposed abortion legislation would automatically include exceptions for rape, incest, and the health of the mother, but lately it seems to be trending away from that. Granted, those things make up a small percentage of all abortions (the last I knew, that number was about 7% and also included cases where it was related to the health of the fetus), but the trend away from consideration of the woman is what disturbs me.

I believe that if I were raped, and got pregnant from it, I would carry the pregnancy to term and either give up the child for adoption or maybe even keep it, because I believe abortion is wrong, and that it is taking a life. At the same time, my saying that assumes that it is my choice to make, and if I did have to deal with that kind of trauma I don’t think any lawmaker or voter should have a say in it. I know people who have had high-risk pregnancies, and you ponder and pray and counsel with your Bishop, but again, you can do all of those things because you have a choice.

My sisters recently shocked another friend with their support for Obama, and one thing the girl asked was that if they knew that the First Presidency was voting for McCain, then would they? But the marvelous thing about that is that they are very careful to not give us an idea of their political preference, or how they are voting, because they don’t want to exercise undue influence. (Besides which, how many candidates would really deserve endorsement by a prophet in this typically lesser-of-two-evils world?)

Now, they do speak out sometimes on moral issues, which is perfectly acceptable, and to which I would pay attention. Many people are angry with the support of California proposition 8, but a church should be able to speak on moral issues. Regardless, I think it may be instructive to look back at some of the areas that they have spoken on.

Since I have been voting, they have spoken on two Oregon state ballot measures. They encouraged us to vote against assisted suicide and for strengthening child pornography laws. (I believe they have also spoken out against legalizing gambling and starting lotteries, but when the Oregon state one started I was twelve, and I have no memories of it.) Every time they do come out with something, they still say to study the issues and vote your conscience.

Here are some of the things that they have not spoken on. I remember at least two bills that would make abortion less accessible. One was parental notification for teenagers, and I can’t remember, but the other one might have been too. There was nothing from the church on that. (Furthermore, when we had someone from LDS Social Services come speak to us, she told us that they will go over all of the options, including abortion. They may not encourage it, but to really be helpful to their clients they do leave everything on the table.)

I also remember two bills by the Oregon Citizens Alliance to stop special rights for homosexuals. There was nothing on that. And why should there be? They didn’t actually have any special rights on the books, so there was nothing for the measure to really do except stir up antagonism between the supporters and opponents. And it doesn’t mean abortions or homosexuality are good things, but some things are not good laws.

Think about it. The War in Heaven was fought over choice, and that means the freedom to make bad choices too. Satan’s plan was to take away choice and so no one would ever sin but no one would ever really be good either. God wants people’s hearts, and they have to give those of their own free will, not because there are things that will get them arrested or that can’t be done without them heading down to Mexico.

Yes, leave immoral things legal, and bad things do happen, but again, that was what we wanted coming down here. We would all have the freedom to choose, and sometimes we would hurt our selves, and sometimes we would hurt others, and sometimes others would hurt us, but our choices actually have meaning, and there is the Atonement to heal the wrongs that get done.

I’m not an anarchist or a Libertarian, so there are lots of laws I support, and sometimes knowing where to draw the line can be really complicated. Right now I know that there are people angry at the Church for supporting Prop 8, but I also know that there are other people (even members) who cannot fathom the simultaneous support for other rights for same-sex couples. I am at peace with it.

I do have one final note, as less recently there was controversy about posting the Ten Commandments in courtrooms, or other monuments. Again, I believe in the Ten Commandments, and try to follow them. I don’t think they belong in a courtroom. The first half are all about our relationship with God, and the courts should not be any judge of that. The last one, against coveting, is about one’s heart, and too intangible to enforce. Killing, stealing, and bearing false witness are reasonably covered by law, and there have been laws on the books about adultery, but it is hard to imagine many modern politicians wanting those enforced. (I guess honoring one’s father and mother can be partially covered by laws against elder abuse.).

They are good commandments, and it would be a better world if everyone believed in them and followed them, but not appropriate for enforcement. Placards with the preamble to the Constitution, or the Declaration of Independence, would be more appropriate, and I believe there was inspiration in those documents too, and it shouldn't be a difficult concept for any follower of Christ to understand that they should be better people than the law requires.

Notes on an election – 316.5

I know I am in the middle of a series here, but history has happened and I am thinking about this more at the moment, so here we go.

Overall I am very pleased with the results. I really had doubts that Obama would be able to pull it off, and I was expecting a real nail-biter of a night. And yet, there it was, so early, and so much more emotional that I was expecting. There faces of the crowd, there in Chicago and the local audiences they showed were great, and it really felt like a cause for celebration.

It does take me back though, to 1988. Naturally I supported Dukakis, but I remember my friend Patrice kind of wishing he wasn’t running, because she liked him and her prediction was that the next president would inherit a mess, only survive a term, and then the next person in would have a successful presidency. This ended up being pretty accurate, coming true with the first Bush and Clinton. Obama is getting a much worse situation than George H.W. Bush did. We all know it, which may help, and I think Obama will use better policy in his efforts, but I do feel some sympathy there.

I am impressed with the Democratic sweep. Certainly in Oregon, where we are down to one Republican representative and no senators, and no Republicans holding key state positions, it is impressive. It may not necessarily be good, and I do understand the risk of a filibuster-proof Senate. However, I think it would be much worse to have a majority of bitter Republicans blocking things out of spite. In addition, the tendency has been for Democrats to be more centrist and moderate, certainly Obama is, and I hope that this will be an opportunity for moderate Republicans to step forward again. If this election can be viewed as a rejection of Neocons and divisive Rovian tactics, good. Yes, those tactics were used, and I can’t believe the amount of people who still think that Obama is a terrorist, or is not eligible to be president by birth, or who think he disrespects the flag, but again, the smear tactics ultimately failed.

I know a lot of people are disappointed in the passing of Proposition 8 in California, but I see something encouraging in it in that while there is a strong majority who voted for it, there is an even stronger majority who voted for Obama for president. If we can get out of the pattern of voters thinking that moral issues are the only criteria for candidate selection, good.

For our own ballot measures, I was pretty happy. I was worried about Measure 64 for a while, and they are still counting, but it looks like it has pulled ahead, and honestly, even if that passes there are legal challenges that can be made. I am thrilled that the double majority was repealed. There was a letter in the Oregonian about how the double majority is the only fair way, because how can something pass if only 26% (say 51% of the 60% who actually vote) of the people support it?

If only 26% of the people were asked, or hey, if only 60% were asked, that would be unfair, but why should the vote of the apathetic count more? The double majority encourages people not to vote if there is a tax measure that they don’t support but appears to have broad support. And exactly how much easier does it need to be to vote? They send you the ballots and the guide two weeks in advance!

There were also a couple of letters ridiculing the indecisiveness of voters and editors who were against the crime measures but for local bond measures. Well, I’ll tell you what, with the crime measures, we don’t know that the sentences will be effective, or necessarily even fair, but we do know that they will cost a lot and that it needs to come out of the already stressed budget, possibly without a real benefit. With the bond measures, there is a plan for paying, an estimate of the impact per homeowner, and a clear set of benefits. Nope, no difference there.

Finally, of course I was disappointed with the election of Matt Wingard, and with what it bodes for his political future. However, two years, and I think I will be volunteering with his opponent’s campaign. Could make the 20-year reunion awkward, but I don’t care. More has come out about additional child abuse, and I suspect there is a lot more out there. It was interesting that at one point I was thinking that I can’t be the only one who is mad about the way he got in, and I found a web site, http://blueoregon.com/, where not only were there people talking about it, but people who know a lot, and can go back and give you six similar situations with there results, and who work phone banks. This is good stuff to know.

Honestly, there were so many gifts this election that it would be ungrateful to get too hung up on one Oregon House member, even if he is evil.

So, I hope none of that sounds like gloating. I am happy about a lot of things, but I’m not feeling scornful towards anyone who voted for McCain. I may think the people stockpiling guns are ridiculous, but at least one part of the retail market is strong.

Why I am not a Republican – 321

I had thought I would write one entry on the topic, but it looks like it will be at least three. That means that I will still be writing on this after the election, but it’s not like there won’t be other elections, and my point is that I want people to think. I am vehemently pro-thought.

So I thought I would start off with the tax issue, because it seems to me that there has been a lot more fear mongering this election than the last one, and a lot of that is based around economic issues.

(And it’s not just economic fears, and not just Mormons. One of my sister’s fundamentalist-surely-does-not-consider-her-a-Christian co-workers seems to think that an Obama victory will bring on enough turmoil that he went and bought a gun. My first thought was surprise that he didn’t already have one, but I was also perplexed. Was it just that Kerry did not seem likely enough to win, or is part of it that Obama is black? Exactly why do you need a gun this time when you didn’t before?)

Anyway, yes, I intend to go off on economics. I’ve been pretty open about the fact that I am currently unemployed and looking for a job. At least one person has suggested to me that businesses are holding off on hiring, because if Obama wins their taxes will go up, and that will hurt business.

I realize taxes are an expense, and can be significant, but I’m just not sure they will hurt the economy. He wants the Bush tax cuts to expire. Okay, were they really helping the economy that much? Really? Because it looks like the economy is in pretty bad shape now, after eight years of Republican rule, and I just don’t think it’s logical to believe another four years will fix it. Maybe the shift will not fix things, but doesn’t trying something different make sense?

The last time my family was doing really well financially was during the Clinton years. People were hiring all over the place and the money was not bad. I wish it were like that now. My brother will tell you that the prosperity we enjoyed then was due to policies implemented by the previous republicans, or the republican congress, so perhaps some will argue that our current downturn is the final result of the Clinton administration. However, it seems more likely to me that the irresponsible tax cuts and increased spending, especially for the military, is the more probable cause.

There’s actually an important point in here in that, with the last three Republican administrations (Reagan and both Bushes), there has been a lack of true fiscal conservatism. Yes, taxes were cut, but spending was not cut proportionally. One thing church leaders strongly admonish members to do is to avoid debt and live within our means. Strange that so many members support political leaders that refuse to do so.

The truth is, there are some things that work better through public finance. It’s not practical for people to build their own roads, so gasoline taxes are collected or road tolls are charged, and the money comes from there. If every family were individually responsible for the full cost of educating its own children, there would be a huge disparity. There is going to be some disparity anyway, in terms of the home resources and support available, but schools are a key area for leveling that playing field. It’s one area where children who start out disadvantaged can get the tools to overcome that.

Taking away from that fund to pay for vouchers or charter schools is robbery. Because the way they do the credits doesn’t mean that poor families can suddenly afford to send their children to exclusive private schools. It just means that the people who can afford it anyway get some of that money back, and maybe the people who can afford an okay school can afford a better school, but the public school has less in its budget. In addition, there is a message of exclusivity sent. Maybe segregating your children from others who are different will protect them from corruption, but it also might make them more judgmental, less compassionate, and take away opportunities to serve and uplift. No Christian should have that as a goal, and are leaders are constantly preaching inclusion.

As for health care, I would be thrilled to have socialized medicine. My medical premiums were almost $2400 a year, not counting co-pays and out of pocket expenses, and also not counting what my employer paid (based on the COBRA paperwork, I’m guessing they paid about $2400 annually also). Now consider the administration and advertising costs of the insurance industry, and maybe even tossing away the advertising and lobbying expenses of the pharmaceutical industry, and the money is already there. We could have it so much better than we actually do, and the redbaiting is ridiculous. Is Canada a repressive Socialist country because they have socialized medicine?

Privatization is not always the answer—not for schools, not for healthcare, and certainly not for retirement funds. Social Security doesn’t pay a lot, but it has been a lot more dependable than the stock market, especially with the sort of corporate dishonesty we have been seeing, from Enron to recent stockbroker scandal. I guess the market does correct itself, in a way, even from lies, theft, and greed. However, if the way it corrects itself is economic collapse, and if we are not willing to take the results of the collapse (Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac bailout), maybe we should just go back to strict regulation. It was suggested a few years ago that more oversight was needed (by a Republican in fact), but the lobbyists won. That worked out well.

So really, looking at the current state of disarray, I can’t see that anyone should be afraid of a policy shift making it worse, and yet fear is what is being sold. There are ads there for Smith that have given up on McCain, so just say that Merkley can’t go because a united president and congress will be too powerful. Yes, it would be a shame if they actually had the power to try and change anything, because everything is so sweet now.

So I have a problem with that, and I have a problem with how smug the Republican members I know are. I don’t think I condescend to them, and I certainly use all of my intelligence and heart to come to my political views, but they are just so sure that I am misguided, and they enjoy thinking it. I don’t want to be like that, so I will at least make one promise, that if Obama does win, I will not gloat.

I am afraid he won’t though. The election has been ugly, people close their minds to logic, and even if the majority of voters do back Obama, I have a nagging fear that with Diebold in the mix it won’t matter. And then there’s no way that I believe McCain will survive for years, so we would have the stain of Palin as the first female president, after which I doubt we could ever get another female in office. But I won’t move to Canada, because I believe in being part of the solution, even when things are bleak.

Just in case anyone is wondering, on economic policies I tend to agree with recent Nobel winner Paul Krugman, and my political hero seems to be Henry Waxman. I know that to some extent he is just doing his job, but it’s an important one, he does it well, and he seems to have plenty of that common sense I adore so.

Why Mormons are usually Republicans – 321.5

Before I get to that, I need to make a side note. Remember at the end of July I did a multi-part series reviewing my “romantic” history, and I mentioned one potential problem for me was that I hung out with guys that I didn’t really like in junior high. There were basically four in the group, and we have already reviewed that one is a dirty politician, and tonight on the ten o’ clock news another one is being investigated for showing porn to kids at the camp where he was a counselor, and possibly doing other things.

I am just really upset about this. I guess I am not as surprised as I could be, and maybe he didn’t do it. They are just investigating and everyone is presumed innocent unless proven guilty, which is why I am not writing his name, but it’s just sickening, and there is no satisfaction in having creepy feelings confirmed, and I feel sorry for him but also angry. It should just be a given that there are things that you do not do, especially when children are involved. Anyway, what I really want is for someone to tell me that Joel is doing great, and is a respected member of his community with no criminal convictions, but I don’t know anyone who has stayed in touch with him. It would be nice if one of the four turned out okay.

Okay, I am ready to get back on track.

Church members will know that it is pretty common for Latter-Day Saints to be politically conservative. If you are not in the church, you may still kind of know, but not realize how certain they tend to be that it is the only correct choice. This is strange, because whenever there are elections, church leaders will read a letter reminding members that the church does not endorse any political party or candidate, but they encourage members to be educated on the issues and choose based on that.

Still, there will be members who are shocked if you are politically liberal, because it is evil. I guess when Brother Weed read the letter a few weeks ago, he shared that when he first registered to vote, someone asked him whom he was voting for, and when he answered “Kennedy” he was told that meant he wasn’t a real Mormon. (I can only assume that would have been against Nixon.)

While Latter-Day Saints is a better name for members of the church, I used Mormons in the title because there is the Gospel, and then there is the culture. Believing that you have to be a Republican is a part of the culture, and the culture has its good points and bad points (and weird ones, like green Jell-o salad with carrots), but it is important not to get the two confused.

Generally there are a few specific issues that lead to the political conservatism. My plan is to go over those issues, and then in the next post go over why I am a Democrat anyway.

Abortion is the biggest one of all, as far as I can tell. You created this life, so you have the responsibility not to destroy it, and part of that is Gospel, in terms of what would be sin, though not necessarily for what should be law. Other moral issues may relate, but it is not uncommon to have single-issue voters on this topic, and if that is your single issue, yeah, you will pretty much be veering right politically.

Guns are also a key issue. Believing that there are hard times coming leading up to Christ’s return, many people want to be able to use firearms as protection, and they know the democrats want nothing more than to forcefully take away everyone’s guns, leaving only the criminals armed. In addition, many of heard of a prophecy that at one point the Constitution of the United States will hang by a thread, and that it will need to be saved, and they envision this meaning armed conflict, for which they will need their guns.

Taxes are also an issue, as we already lose some income paying tithing. I know the first date I went on after high school was with a guy who was very anti-tax because of that. His argument was that the British have ninety percent of their income taxed away, so how could they even pay tithing when they only had the ten percent for their own in the first place? (Actually, that date didn’t go very well.) A Republican government will let you keep your money to decide to give it to charity and do venture capital efforts, and you will. Otherwise you’re just Communists.

School choice, with vouchers and charter schools, may also be an issue for some, as there are some strong home-school proponents, but that kind of gets back to the morals issue, so you can be separated from the vermin in public schools and the filth they teach.

I believe those are the basics right there, maybe with some oversimplification. It will get a bit longer next time when I give the rebuttal.

Of course I’m voting for Obama – 322.5

Actually, I already voted for him. We did our ballots Sunday night.

Yes, I did support Hilary in the primary, but Ralph Nader aside, there has in fact been a huge difference between the two candidates for this election and the past two, and voting for someone who is completely ideologically opposed to you because of sour grapes is idiotic. (And adding a woman to the other ticket is not really conciliatory based on what woman was added.)

Yes, there was a time when I seriously considered voting for McCain, many years ago, and he seemed like a completely different person. Rich Lowry of the National Review had an interesting piece yesterday on how McCain’s career has been built on being a gadfly, so when he would take principled stands on various areas in opposition to his party, it was more that he liked being the truth-teller, standing in opposition, than that he had a thorough understanding of the issue and strong beliefs. Looking over the past few years, it makes a lot of sense, and I think in times like these we are better off with a policy wonk who will think things out and strive for intelligent solutions, rather than a contrarian who will simply be looking for an argument.

I myself had expressed concerns about his lack of accomplishments and experiences, feeling it was a little arrogant of him to run so soon, but I understand the need to capitalize on the moment. Besides, apparently a lack of long-term experience makes you refreshingly untouched and uncorrupt, which can be wonderful if you are not an idiot (and he is not, but someone else inexperienced in the race is).

Speaking of Sarah Palin, I am amazed at how much I despise her. When she was first tapped I kind of thought it was a stroke of brilliance. After all, suddenly you have a woman on the ticket, and generally you need your running mate to be more extreme than you. From what I had known of Palin already, that was true, especially on the issues of abortion and oil drilling, and apparently guns as well.

This was August 29th, though, and so I really did not see much more of her before we left. I saw a few pictures, and read about her disdain for community organizers. The first time I ever heard her speak was watching the news in Australia. I knew that there had been a gaffe with someone asking about her reading habits, but what I saw was her response later, when she mentioned some interesting reading about Obama’s terrorist associations. The story itself is a pretty sleazy thing to bring up, because it is so immaterial and yet they link it with the T-word and so it is just the basest kind of demagoguery, and yet that wasn’t surprising. What else do they have really?

What was surprising was how poorly she speaks. There are all these long pauses between the words—I think she actually might be a worse speaker than Bush, and I wasn’t expecting that. Oh yeah, people who were upset about Clinton not getting the nomination should totally vote for McCain-Palin. They’re exactly alike. [end sarcasm]

Palin has irritated me still more by her claim of exoneration after the committee investigating “Troopergate”. We had just seen the story the previous day. The bipartisan committed concluded unanimously that there was a breach of ethics and abuse of power, and if Palin had just said that she was pleased to have been exonerated of any criminal wrongdoing that would be one thing, but she added “any hint of any kind of unethical activity there.” Huh? So, yeah, I basically hate her.

However, I do not wish to leave you with the impression that I am supporting Obama due to simple elimination of the most objectionable, and he happens to be the one left. I feel like he is intelligent and ethical, and although there is a huge mess to be resolved and I don’t have great hopes for any mere mortal, he is the best of the contenders.

For one thing, I appreciate the way he can listen intelligently. I had serious doubts about watching the last debate, because really, nothing was going to change my mind and so it seemed like it would just be a waste of time. However, it was interesting to watch them, and I was impressed with how he held himself. He listened to the points made by McCain, sometimes he made notes, and when he answered, he answered with confidence and intelligence. McCain seemed really squirmy, unable to respect an opinion other than his own, and honestly, I thought it was really dirty eight years ago when Bush was questioning his mental stability but now I kind of do.

In addition, I have gained a better sense of Obama’s ability to inspire. People all over the world are watching this election, and they are hoping for a change, where there is an America they can respect again. No one gave us grief for being American, but none of them like Bush. I asked one guide about that, and he said he never met anyone who admitted to voting for Bush. Maybe that’s true. If you are traveling the world and getting outside this ethnocentric mindset where of course we can invade Iraq if we want too, it gets kind of hard for you to support Bush.

Remember, we didn’t just take to Australians and New Zealanders. We talked to Belgians, Swiss, English, French, Shanghainese, Fijian, Scottish, and Italian. One of the Belgians had actually seen Obama in Germany, and said it was amazing. Seven years ago the United States suffered a terrible tragedy, but received an amazing outpouring of support from all over the world. Instead of building on that, our leaders have worked hard to alienate countries all over, and killed the memory of the time when we were an example. The world would like that time back, and it seems possible to them.

The world gets smaller all the time and it is an amazing thing, but it increases the need for us to get along, and that involves not being bullies. I think we have a clear choice.

Please do not vote for Matt Wingard – 322.5

Generally I would prefer to be about voting for one candidate instead of against another, but much of my voting life has been choosing between the lesser of two evils, and this candidate is truly the greater evil.

If you have been following the news at all, much has been made of him attacking his son with a screwdriver, and that is not my issue. No, I am not really comfortable with the idea of hitting a seven year old in the head with anything, but it was several years ago, and it is totally possible that he has taken the anger management classes, and gotten help, and should be able to move on with his life. You might be able to argue that you don’t get to have a political life if you do these things, at least not if people find out before you get elected, and I think that might have influenced the situation that made me mad.

Wingard, a republican, is running for a seat in House District 26. He also currently holds this seat, without having won it, managing it through sheer party politics and chicanery. Jerry Krummel, also a republican, had the job, but resigned to take another job with a few months left on his term. The policy is that a joint board of county commissioners will make a selection out of three filed candidates, and if there are not three candidates the governor will make an appointment. Clearly the purpose of that policy is that even if the voters do not get a say, there is a selection, and a good candidate can be chosen.

The county commissioners made this decision, because they had three candidates. The candidates were Matt Wingard, one of his campaign volunteers, and a college student that Wingard pays to post campaign signs. Both of them said they did not want the position, and endorsed Matt.

The county commissioners that voted for Matt were all republican as well. Of the democrats, two voted for the college kid, one abstained because he knew too much about Matt to be impartial, and one abstained because the entire thing was a joke. Under the circumstances I’m not sure what I would have done. I would have been angry at the manipulation, but did they have time to see it coming and rouse up some legitimate competition?

Regardless, two unequivocal supporters are not competition, and it should have gone to the governor. Since he is a democrat, I think that is one reason why they did it this way. Regardless of party, I think you could not appoint either Wingard or Adamson, because it is too much of an endorsement of either candidate for a contested seat. I think I would have gone for some respected retired community member—after all, it is only for a few months. This begs the question, why bother with the manipulation for only a few months, and I think it goes back to the child abuse.

When the story came out, there was a lot of inter-party conflict about whether Wingard should withdraw, because some people no longer felt like they could support him and a lot of people didn’t mind the conviction on its own, but had doubts about his ability to win. This was a concern because he was regarded as a rising star in the party and that he would be a key player in the future.

I think they found a brilliant way to get around that. A lot of people automatically vote for the incumbent, and with Wingard now in the election as the incumbent it defuses the stigma of the conviction. I say it’s brilliant, but it also involves a complete lack of integrity, utter disrespect for the voters (and their intelligence), and open contempt for the law by those who are entrusted with making and upholding the law.

In the interest of full disclosure, I went to school with Matt, and we hung out in the same group in junior high. In high school we went in separate directions, and I really have not been in touch with him. This is not a personal attack, although I will say that it did not surprise me at all that he was using manipulation to get ahead. He was already pretty good at manipulation at fourteen, so it makes sense that he has honed that particular skill, especially in politics.

On another level, it is personal in that if I had not recognized his name I would not have read the story, and been infuriated by it. I admit that, but also I have grown from that because I realize that I should have read it regardless. What happens with in-state politics is important, and affects everyone in state. Another article that disturbed me a while back was one showing the relationship between political contributions and getting your issues heard. Maybe we can only vote for one representative, but we can still keep track of the other district representatives and write letters or reprimands or have an impact in some way.

Regarding Jessica Adamson, she seems okay. She has an impressive list of endorsements, mainly based on her policies and experience. Wingard himself said this election is about transportation, and she definitely has more experience there. In addition, for those of you who might have qualms about voting for a democrat, she was a republican until recently, but switched because she felt the party had lost touch. That would be a discussion for another day.

One thing that impresses me a lot is that if you go to her web page, there is nothing about Matt. It is her biography and platform and endorsements. On Matt’s page, the first thing you see is a letter from his son’s mother condemning her, and complaining that she must have some reporter from the Oregonian in her pocket. It’s not like Willamette Week ignored the story.

Anyway, this is one that I hope you will consider and will forward to anyone in District 26. Wingard is poised to go far, and that will be dangerous. This can be nipped in the bud.

http://jessicaadamson.com/

Ch-ch-ch-changes – 324

I am now back at my own computer and desk. Actually, I’ve been back for just over a week now, but there was unpacking and laundry and phone calls and all the things that happen when you have been gone for a month.

I am now unemployed. My company denied me permission to go abroad for a month, as was their right. What bugged me was that after weeks of hearing “We’re still looking into it,” and “We’re waiting to hear back,” by the time I got a firm “no”, it was three days before I was leaving. Perhaps I should have assumed that it was going to go that way, and started looking for a job a few weeks before leaving. As it was, there was no point in starting to submit applications when I found out. It can take a company three days to call you, and I would not have been around to answer the phone.

A full break would have been one thing, but what they actually said, after thanking me for being so professional about leaving (trying to get as much work ahead done as possible, and documenting how to do the things I do), they said to keep in touch and reapply when I got back. So, that was one of the phone calls, and after beating around the bush a little they told me the position was filled. On one level it was a relief, because it was getting harder and harder to overlook certain corporate shortcomings, and I lost all respect for my manager, but I hate job hunting—and I haven’t really had to do any hard-core job searches for over ten years.

I hate that aspect of my current life, but I can’t regret the trip. There were so many wonderful experiences and memories, and so many wonderful people, and I feel really recharged. I didn’t even know that I needed recharging until I began to feel the difference.

I was able to do a fair amount of posts from the road, but never with photos and a lot of things were missed. I want to go back over those in greater detail, but I also have non-travel things I want to write about, so I have spun off a second blog. Sporktastic Travel can be viewed at http://sporktogo.blogspot.com/. I will start off going over all of the spots in Australia and New Zealand, and each post will have pictures. When I finish that, I will start reviewing Italy, which I have never written about despite going there twice. After that, well, I have never written about Hawaii, or Toronto or Disneyland. By then, we may be ready to go somewhere new. We’re looking at Scotland now, largely due to how charming and wonderful their men are. More details may come out about that.

This week’s sporkful (http://sporkful.blogspot.com/) will remain for everything else. Tomorrow it will start off with the election, and it will not be starting off with the presidential election. I have a local race I am very concerned about. Yes, it would have been good to post before people started getting their ballots.

I have half a mind to create a third blog to post the preparedness newsletters, but that might be overkill—or just time to bag it all and get my own URL. I have almost done that, actually. I have joined Facebook.

Initially I had a horror of social networking sites, because there just seemed to be so much stupidity associated with MySpace, and I did not want any part in that. It wasn’t just teens putting up skanky pictures, and meeting with predators, and harassing other kids, it was also the ranking of friends. Maria had a friend who had to be Number 1, and would punish infractions by lowering Maria’s ranking. She is approaching forty—leave junior high behind. Now!

Anyway, Maria left MySpace (and the “friendship”), and joined Facebook, and she kept finding all these people she hadn’t seen for ages, which I like, and you don’t rank your friends, and it is free. I had actually subscribed to Classmates, and it got me in touch with three people whose e-mail addresses I kept losing, so that was good, but why am I paying for it when there is a free one? Anyway, I joined two days ago.

One thing I have been wanting to do on the blog is have an area where I post the last movie watched and last book read, and I could never figure out how to do that. I am now adding those as notes to Facebook. I will periodically list what I am currently reading, what the last book was, and a short review of it.

I think the desire to do this comes from me missing my book club. We scattered to the four winds, and at some point after that I developed the urge to tell people about the books I read. Until I have a new job and schedule, I can’t really form a new one, so this will have to do for now. Maybe someone will read it and write to me, “Hey, that sounds interesting. Can I borrow it from you? And then maybe after I’ve finished we can discuss it?” It could happen.

If you are wondering, obviously the fact that I am job hunting means that I have not made it big as a screenwriter yet. However, I really only have one screenplay done, and it is not exactly in wide circulation. I still have hopes, but the industry average is that you will have written nine before you sell one. I have one that is about half done, and there is one that I sort of did as a script, but I wrote as a short story first. My goal is to concentrate on those two for now, since I have time. Anyway, it will be fun working on a vampire story this time of year.

The Beautiful South

The South Island has been gorgeous. We flew into Queenstown, and started out that night for Te Anau. This is the standard departure point for Milford Sound.

It is an amazingly scenic country. There are mountains and lakes and rivers everywhere. Also, there are fields of sheep everywhere. One nice thing about coming in the spring is that it is lambing season, and somehow I never get tires of seeing baby lambs bounding around and wagging their tails.

Milford Sound is about a two hour bus ride away from Te Anau. Our bus did not leave until 11, so we started with a little hike around lake Te Anau. One area has some birds that are being rehabilitated, and we were able to see the very endangered takahe. It looks a lot like the pukeko, but you see those everywhere, whereas the takahe population is down to less than 100. We were lucky. The birds have been there for a while, but they are usually hiding.

The bus trip was gorgeous. You have new growth, but still some of the old fall colors. Also, we ran into kea, a native parrot, at multiple locations, and they are a really fun bird. They have lots of personality. They are also thieves given an opportunity, so I would not recommend setting anything down around them.

The Sound itself was all fogged in, so we did not see very much. Still, I always like being on a boat. However, it is easy to get the impression that going there automatically means you will see dolphins, and that is not true. Our guide Chris says you have about a 1 in 4 chance, which is not horrible, but no guarantee. We only saw some seals and birds. No Fiordland Crested penguins either.

The next day we took off for Dunedin and the Otago peninsula. This might have been one of the best days of the trip. The area is beautiful, and in the course of our tour I think we covered the entire peninsula. We toured the grounds of Larnach Castle, went by the Royal Albatross colony, then to Sandfly Bay (named for the way the sand flies with the wind, not for the presence of sand flies), and we finished at Penguin Place, getting up close views of many Yellow-Eyed Penguins.

I should end up posting more about everything after I get back. We head home Tuesday. I want to include links and pictures. I have hundreds. I think I am actually going to set up a second blog that is just for travel, and leave this for everything else.

See you all soon.

Rotorua stinks (literally)

This does not mean that you should not come. There is cool stuff to see here, and other cool stuff nearby. However, the town's initial claim to fame is a number of hot springs, and there is just a constant scent of sulphur. When you go out for fresh air, it isn't. I don't know--I guess people in Albany get used to the paper mill. I seem to remember a similar place in California. If I remember correctly, it was near Mt. Shasta, but it was up away from everything.

Here the entire city is built around it, and it was the original tourist attraction in the area, going back as far as the 1860's. City residents and those within two miles radius can tap into the geothermal source for their heating, which is a huge cost savings. There are also a lot of spas built around it, but the pools must be redirected, because you cannot go in directly. The temperature of one pool is 140 degrees Celsius. They have lost a few people. They used to lose the occasional drunk, but they have since put up railings around each pool and spout. Also, there have been some suicides, and our tour guide stopped at least two tourists from going in, so I suppose there could have been tourists whom no one was there to stop. Grim.

So we stopped by the Waitomo Glowworm Caves on the way here yesterday, and today we have just come back from Hobbiton. Now we need to watch the movies again. We saw the party tree, both of Sam's houses, and Bag End. Do I sound like a geek now? Oh well. It was, and still is, a large working sheep farm, so they also did a shearing demonstration for us, and we got to bottle feed lambs. Adorable. They are so cute when they run. They haven't been docked yet, so they still have long tails and they wag them when they feed.

Tomorrow we have a kiwi encounter at Rainbow Springs Nature Park, where we will also see many other native birds and reptiles, as well as trout, and then we go to a Maori performance and feast at night. Then Thursday we take off for the South Island. This is Tuesday, so a week from tonight we will be back at home. Actually, the rain today has been a lot like home, so the transition may not be too harsh.

The Bay of Islands

I am currently writing from an internet cafe in Auckland, New Zealand. We got here Friday, and the next day took an early morning coach tour to the Bay of Islands. It is a bit of a drive, but definitely something worth seeing. There are various cruises that you can try, and the one I ended up choosing was the Excitor Fast Boat Tour--a questionable decision.

Now, I like being on boats, including fast ones, and I like it when it gets kind of bumpy too. So when we were coming back from the Great Barrier Reef, and the boat was at a 45 degree angle the entire time, I loved it. When we were cruising around Eaglehawk Neck in Tasmania, it was cold and there was spray, and some choppiness, but I still loved it. Somehow, this one wasn't as good.

First off, they packed us all into these waterproof red pants and jackets. It really reduced mobility, and I was worried about roasting, but it wasn't too bad. Also, they put us in life jackets right away, whereas on the other tours those have been on the boat, but only put on in case of emergency. Maybe this should have been my clue that things were going to be different.

Anyway, it started out great. The Excitor is 60 feet long, but seems smaller, and is kind of set up like a speed boat but with more seating. We hit some bumps, but those were just part of the fun. Mainly, I was trying to keep my eye open for dolphins.

As we got further into the bay, it didn't get bumpier, but there started to be a lot more spray. It was very cold, and kind of lashed the cheeks. I was getting saltwater in my eyes and swallowing some, so that was irritating, and water was getting in around the cold weather gear and wetting my actual clothes.

We got to the hole in the rock, and we were able to go through (it is not guaranteed for safety reasons, as under the wrong conditions passage would be a great way to smash the boat), and that was pretty cool, and we got to see the other caves and Wahini Moana, natural rock formation that looks like a woman staring down into the sea. So things were looking up a bit, and then we started back, and it was really bad, with so much water that I could barely keep my eyes open.

Then we saw dolphins, and it was almost like all of the bad stuff melted away. They were so beautiful, and so much closer than when we were watching from the cliff on Kangaroo Island. It's funny, because no matter how much we have seen, every time we encounter another creature, we all go "Oh,"--even if it is the fiftieth koala. Our weak point is clear.

They bobbed up and down a bit around the boat, and finally dove away and we headed back.

We were in fact quite wet, and stayed that way for the entire ride back to Auckland. Tired, wet, and bedraggled, we did something we have never done before and ordered room service.

Would I recommend that cruise again? Er, I would at least look at the other boat options and maybe find something covered, but I totally have no regrets about going on that one, because we did see the dolphins. And we have seen the bay, as well as the Waitangi Treaty Grounds, learning a bit more about Maori and New Zealand history. It hasn't been our best day perhaps, but it was still a good day.

Tomorrow we head to Rotorua.