Self Reliance — In Political Thinking

Posted on May 15, 2013 by Thayne Andersen

In my last post, I shared the thought that an essay written well over 100 years ago had caused me a considerable about of thought this past week.

This essay, by Ralph Waldo Emerson, is titled “Self Reliance‘.  The essay was written in 1741 and yet has applicability today.  With so many beliefs, innovations, and dogma being thrown around, some of his ideas will undoubtedly get more believers than others.

Here are a few of the great quotes that come from this one essay:

“Speak what you think today in hard words and tomorrow speak what tomorrow thinks in hard words again, though it contradict every thing you said today.”
― Ralph Waldo Emerson, Self-Reliance
“My life is not an apology, but a life. It is for itself and not for a spectacle. I much prefer that it should be of a lower strain, so it be genuine and equal, than that it should be glittering and unsteady.”
― Ralph Waldo Emerson, Self-Reliance
“I am ashamed to think how easily we capitulate to badges and names, to large societies and dead institutions.”
― Ralph Waldo Emerson, Self-Reliance
“Insist on yourself; never imitate. Your own gift you can present every moment with the cumulative force of a whole life’s cultivation; but of the adopted talent of another you have only an extemporaneous half possession. That which each can do best, none but his Maker can teach him.”
― Ralph Waldo Emerson, Self-Reliance
“the great man is he who in the midst of the crowd keeps with perfect sweetness the independence of solitude.”
― Ralph Waldo Emerson, Self-Reliance
“Greatness is a property for which no man can receive credit too soon; it must be possessed long before it is acknowledged.”
― Ralph Waldo Emerson, Self Reliance
“A man should learn to detect and watch that gleam of light which flashes across his mind from within, more than the lustre of the firmament of bards and sages. Yet he dismisses without notice his thought, because it is his. In every work of genius we recognize our own rejected thoughts: they come back to us with a certain alienated majesty.”
― Ralph Waldo Emerson, Self-Reliance
“Men have looked away from themselves and at things so long that they have come to esteem the religious, learned and civil institutions as guards of property, and they deprecate assaults on these, because they feel them to be assaults on property. They measure their esteem of each other by what each has, and not by what each is.”
― Ralph Waldo Emerson, Self-Reliance
“These are the voices which we hear in solitude, but they grow faint and inaudible as we enter into the world. Society everywhere is in conspiracy against the manhood of everyone of its members. Society is a joint-stock company, in which the members agree, for the better securing of his bread to each shareholder, to surrender the liberty and culture of the eater. The virtue in most request is conformity. Self-reliance is its aversion. It loves not realities and creators, but names and customs.”
― Ralph Waldo Emerson, Self-Reliance

Emerson’s words resonate with me.  I also read an essay this week about Abraham Lincoln about his thoughts about slavery laws.  He believed that the laws that required the return of runaway slaves were not only wrong, but immoral to follow.  His solution was not just to refuse to obey them, but to repeal them.  When the laws themselves are wrong, a patriot must not obey them AND work to change them.

This kind of thinking goes so much against my simple upbringing that it took many years for me to consider what to do.  I was brought up believing, “We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.” LDS 12th Article of Faith

How can I obey, honor and sustain a bad, immoral and unconstitutional law?  According to my parents, we must obey the law until it is changed.

Henry David Thoreau

Henry Thoreau wrote an essay about civil disobedience.  (Read it HERE).  He was arrested for not paying a “poll tax” and confined to jail.

Seeing the wall of the cell in which he was confined, made of solid stone 2 or 3 feet thick, and the door of wood and iron a foot thick, he said to himself, “If there were a wall of stone between me and my townsmen, there was still a more difficult one to climb or break through before they could get to be as free as I was.”

Thoreau may have also brooded over the reaction of Emerson, who criticized the imprisonment as pointless. According to some accounts, Emerson visited Thoreau in jail and asked, “Henry, what are you doing in there?” Thoreau replied, “Waldo, the question is what are you doing out there?” Emerson was “out there” because he believed it was shortsighted to protest an isolated evil; society required an entire rebirth of spirituality.

Learning By My Experience In Europe

I lived in Europe between 1999 and 2006 while working for the US military.  I visited many of the WW II concentration camps and the cemeteries in France and Belgium.   I read of the laws made in Germany against hiring or harboring Jews.  Some laws required that Jews wear identification stars on their clothing.  Those who refused were killed.

I visited the home of Anne Frank in Amsterdam where she and her family hid from the German authorities for two years before being betrayed and sent to die in the killing camps.  The family that allowed the Franks to live there broke the law under the threat of being killed themselves.  I visited locations where others broke unjust laws to smuggle food and necessities to those who were starving.  I learned of many brave people who died rather than obey laws that killed other people.

My admiration for people who had enough personal standard of “right” and “wrong” to obey good laws while defying or changing bad ones grew throughout my stay in Europe.

As Thoreau wrote: “Whoso would be a man must be a nonconformist. He who would gather immortal palms must not be hindered by the name of goodness, but must explore if it be goodness. Nothing is at last sacred but the integrity of your own mind.“

At this time in my life, I enjoy diversity in political thought.  I like thoughtful banter.  I respect those who disagree with me regarding one issue or another.  I dislike being labeled as a “liberal”, or any other simplistic label (because I am first and foremost ME).  I support the private ownership of guns and most environmental issues, but have no issue with those who think for themselves and believe otherwise.

Obedience is not patriotism

Categories: being good, family, fear, obedience, Personal history and life story | Tags: , , , | Leave a comment

Self Reliance – Early Beginnings For Me

Posted on May 8, 2013 by Thayne Andersen

I read the entire essay of Ralph Waldo Emerson today on “Self Reliance“. (You may download the entire text of this famous essay by clicking HERE)  I was driving back from a weekend trip to Moab, Utah to visit with two of my brothers about life, love, religion and politics.  I had an audio CD of Emerson’s essay from The Great Courses that was given to me by my neighbor.  It was a rewarding experience.

His thoughts, as expressed in this famous essay hit a resonant chord in my consciousness.  I know that Emerson was not particularly well thought of during his lifetime.  Some thought him to be arrogant and conceited.  But he was still one of the most popular orators of his day — and his essay on Self-Reliance was one of his most popular ones.

 My early experiences with self Reliance

My parents taught me about the principle of self Reliance.  It means that, whenever possible, I should rely on my own resources to live.  I should not expect others to take care of me if I can take care of myself through saving, planning and intelligent behavior.  Mom and Dad often lived hand-to-mouth in making a living.  Dad was a salesman and often his income had a difficult time paying all the bills of his rather large family (including seven children).  We were taught to plant a garden, save things that were useful and throw out only things that had been totally used.  I was encouraged to go deer hunting whenever possible to put extra meat on the table.  We had a family system where we would grind our own wheat and make out own cereal.  Dad would point out that many things could be eaten that were right outside in the lawn — like dandelions and other herbs.

Mom made a lot of the clothing that we wore.  In addition, she would often make clothes that she could exchange as barter for things that were needed by the family.

As I grew older, I learned about the admonitions by local church leaders to store all the things that might be needed in a short emergency — such as food, medicine and other necessities.

I was born two years before the first atomic bomb explosion.  As I went to public school, I was shown that there was a very real possibility of an atomic war with Russia and prudent families were starting to stash away the things that they might need if this kind of war broke out.  We never went so far as to have a bomb shelter, but we did have a significant supply of non-perishable food and other supplies.

The question often came up in discussing “preparedness” as to what to do to defend the things that you had the foresight to save.

Should we have a large supply of guns?  We knew that in a large population, many would not be as prepared as we would be in storing foods, medicines and other needed articles.  These people would, in all likelihood, come looking for the things we saved so there their families would live.  Should we be prepared to kill our neighbors if they come to feed their own families?  This is especially true in Idaho, because it is common knowledge that LDS (“Mormon”) families are more likely than other families to have storage of food than other families.  From the year that I was married, I tried to keep the admonition to keep food sufficient to last for several months of a year.  This was often used as a support for my bed or stacked in closets in environmentally safe containers — though I seldom ACTUALLY ate any of it.  I still remember having to lug huge cans of honey and wheat from one apartment to another as we moved around.

Dad was NEVER a violent person by nature.  He was of the opinion that if we ever had a nuclear war that we should open our supplies to help anyone who might need them.  There was no such a procedure as simply calling, “9-1-1″ in an emergency.  Although we would be entirely on our own in the event of war, he felt that we should be ready at all times to share what we have with others.

Whatever the nature of a potential emergency or national disaster, we should be as prepared as possible — and then share what we can with others less fortunate — or less prepared.

Dad would not even consider shooting our neighbors — even though we had guns — if they wanted to take from us the things we had saved for ourselves.

The only really large disaster that ever happened in Idaho in the 70 or so years that I have lived were fires or the Teton Dam flood of 1976.  In both of these emergencies, those who had stockpiles of food lost their entire supply and STILL had to rely on others to help them — including government assistance.

Living In Alaska and Learning About a Subsistence Lifestyle — Or Living Off The Land

Soon after moving to Alaska in 1973, I learned about many people who choose to live there and “live off the land”.  They use as little money as possible, don’t carry any insurance, barter for what they need and shoot game as well as catch fish for food.

In addition, I learned that Alaska is a very unforgiving place to work, fish or live in.  If you are not prepared for the weather and conditions — even if it means swimming only 100 yards in an emergency — it could easily kill you.

Roughly 70% of Alaska is “owned” by the Federal Government — which means the citizens of the United States.  Most of the rest is “owned” by the State of Alaska — which means the citizens of Alaska.

On many occasions, I have gone deep into Alaskan areas where I had to get myself back out.  I could not depend on others, or the police, or the military, or even the phone — as there was NO phone service.

On many occasions, I went on a hunting trip into the Alaskan “Bush”.  I knew beforehand that I was responsible for getting myself out of any potential situation that I faced.  I could not expect anyone else to help  me unless I was in a life-threatening situation — and even then, I would have to pay the cost of my own rescue.

A pet peeve of mine is whenever someone goes into the Alaska back-country with an expensive 4-wheeler, snow machine, boat or airplane and then have some kind of break-down.  They seem to expect others to not only come to rescue them, but to also foot the cost of the rescue or have the public pay for it.  If you don’t want to pay for your rescue, don’t go where you have to be rescued!

The wildlife resources of Alaska belong to the public — not to anyone who wants to, to go shoot up the place.

I can’t count the times that people think that they can simply go into the Alaska bush and shoot all the game that they see there — claiming that they are “entitled” in some way to live off the land.  They are NOT!  Many people go buy expensive 4-wheelers or boats and then claim that they need to kill a moose or caribou so that they don’t have to buy expensive meat in the store.  This attitude infuriates me.  One reality show on TV last year claimed that the fisherman needed to catch several hundred pounds of subsistence salmon so that they would not go hungry over the long Alaskan winter.  They were fishing in a $20,000 aluminum boat at the time!!!!  That is NOT being self-sufficient!

In today’s economy, we cannot ever be completely self-Reliant.  We benefit from the research done by others, by professionals trained in public schools and by military resources that we seldom see.

We need to be as self-reliant as possible, but also admit that we will never return to the times of Little House On The Prairie and be completely independent and self sufficient.

We also have a duty and obligation to take care of the environment that belongs to all of us.

In my next post, I want to discuss being self-reliant as it pertains to independent thought, politics and other issues we face in the world of the internet.

 

Categories: Credo, Personal history and life story, Uncategorized | Tags: , , , , | 5 Comments

Thoughts About April 18, 2013 & The Boston Marathon Bombings

Posted on April 24, 2013 by Thayne Andersen

April 18, 2013 was my birthday – my 70th.  It was also Patriot’s Day and the day of the Boston Marathon.

For my birthday, I walked 3 miles.  At the half-way point a big pyrenees sheep dog came up to me to play and get a pat on the head.  I greeted him and then shoved my hands into my pockets to keep them from getting wet from being licked and then started walking up the road.  The dog still wanted to play, so he jumped in my way, tripping me up and causing me to lose my balance.  I face-planted on the pavement, resulting in a lot of pain and blood.

Feeling sorry for myself, I headed back home — trying not to drip too much blood on my clothes.  Not a very good way to celebrate attaining the age of 70, is it?

Boston Marathon Day

Today, a tragic thing happened at the Boston Marathon — two bombs exploded, killing and wounding several people.  It is now a week later and a lot of information has been obtained about the bombings and the alleged perpetrators — two young men who were living in the Boston area.  One was killed by police (killing a police officer in the process) and the other was captured, wounded and is getting medical care.

The outpouring of courage and help that was given is enormous.  But who would do such a thing — even killing a small boy?  Our history validates the facts that a lot of kinds of people in the US have murderous impulses that they act upon.

There are always the mentally ill.  People simply depressed, angry, off their medications or otherwise emotionally and mentally sick.

But there are other groups of people who have committed violent acts.  We can generally rule out women.  I see little evidence that women are in the mindset to commit acts of mass violence.

We can also rule out elderly people of both sexes.  It is young men who generally are identified as violent-prone.

We can generally classify those who murder innocent people as being motivated by politics or religion.

So, often we find that those who take it upon themselves to kill a bunch of people they do not even know are trying to put into practice the feelings of righteousness and superiority  that religion gives them.  From the Crusades to the Inquisition, many who kill with a sense of purpose are motivated by some kind of religious fervor.

So we waited to see what law enforcement would find about the perpetrators of the bombings.  Within a couple days they identified two brothers.  One was killed by police in a shootout (while a police officer was also killed), and the other was arrested after being severely wounded.

One of the things that was interesting to me was a news interview on TV with the Mother of the boys.    She “knew” that her boys were “100% innocent” of the bombings.  While I admire the loyalty she shows, she is also showing the problem with “faith” — that it sometimes is simply wrong!  In the face of facts (truth), faith and loyalty must give way.  (Yes, I know that several conspiracy theorists claim that the US government has framed these innocent boys — but that also is contrary to common sense, in my humble opinion.)

I want to point out an interesting (and, I think valid) commentary about the role of religion and tribal honor in the Boston Marathon bombings in the Christian Science Monitor. (click HERE to read it)

Converts

I have noticed throughout my life that those who are newly converted to a religious faith tend to be more “devout”, more “strict” and less “liberal” than those who have been converted  for long periods of time.  The same thing can be said for those who leave their religion for something else — they tend to be in posession of stronger feelings of animosity than those who never were members of the religion.

In the case of the Boston Marathon bombers, they had apparently recently become converted to their Religion.  They had stopped going to parties, stopped drinking alcohol, started praying and attending church and started reading books prescribed by their chosen religion — even getting a spiritual “mentor” who helped then radicalize themselves.  It is often called being “born again”.  Most long-term religious leaders can radicalize their members and at the same time avoid the allegations of leading them to do stupid things.  The leaders profit from the devotion of the members in doing things that the leaders are smart enough not to do themselves.

Converts can often be led by simplistic sets of logic that unbelievers easily avoid.

For example, consider this Hubble telescope photo of the Whirlpool Galaxy:

Some believers claim that such beauty is evidence of a Creator that is called, God.

It truly is a beautiful photograph.  But most would leave it as simply being a stunningly beautiful photo.

A “believer”, however would follow this up and say something like:

  1. Since there IS a God, He wants us to praise Him and do what he declares for us to do — like “obey” him
  2. Since we must obey, we must study the scriptures and attend religious meetings
  3. Since……
  4. Since……
  5. Since we must wear approved clothing to identify us as believers, we…….
  6. Since the leader has decided that he must test our devotion, we must take a couple bombs and kill people we do not even know so we can please God.

….And so we now have people killing each other in the name of Religion.

Categories: Uncategorized | Tags: , , , | Leave a comment

Life: It’s Beginnings and Endings (Abortion, Conception and Murder) The Real Meaning of “Reverence For Life”

Posted on April 8, 2013 by Thayne Andersen

We each began life in this very way

My readers know by now that I was raised in a devout LDS home.  I was taught from my youth about the Purpose of Life.  This post for my blog will tackle the topic of life, death, abortion and about the topic of when life starts and ends.  I hope I can get through it without writing an entire book on the topic.

When Does Life Start?

Anyone with a basic understanding of biology knows that human life basically starts with life.  An egg and a sperm “get together” and start dividing cells till a baby is eventually born.  But that is not the entire story.  A cluster of cells can divide into two or more individuals that can be born as twins or more.  These cells can then be “born” as two individuals nine months later.

Religious tradition has it that when a child is “born”, it can then be named and celebrations are had to show that a new life has entered the world.  I know of no religion that traditionally  believes that a new life has started prior to the time that the child leaves the mother’s womb.  A miscarried baby has no legal status, no name is typically given and genealogy lists exclude that child other than by mention of a possible entry of a “still-born” or miscarried child.

Fertilization happens inside the fallopian tubes of a woman.  Some people want our laws to reflect that “personhood” begins at the instant that fertilization happens.  If this is true, then roughly 50% of ALL deaths happen prior to the implanting of a newly fertilized egg, because this is how many fertilized eggs do NOT implant in the uterus.

Rather that rant and rave about when a fertilized human egg becomes a “person”, for the bulk of this post, I want to discuss the relationship between the “purpose of Life” and compare this to different ideas on when human life begins.

Women and Eggs

For example, few would consider the destruction of either a sperm or a human egg to be anything like “murder’ — because there are simply so many that could never become born using any kind of a medical or scientific standard.  When women are born, they contain all the possible eggs inside their ovaries.  This amounts to roughly 1-2 million immature eggs (called follicles).  Beginning at birth, these eggs start to die through a process called atresia.  By the time a woman matures sexually, only about 400,000 of these eggs remain.  With each menstrual cycle about 1,000 of these eggs die off and one lucky little egg matures and is released as a mature (but unfertilized) egg or ovum.

Over the course of a woman’s life only about 400 will survive as mature eggs, with one being released during each menstrual cycle on the average.   Theoretically each of these eggs could be fertilized and eventually be born as a baby (assuming that any woman could endure such an experience).

Men and Sperm

For men, (the other half of the donation to the chromosome set for babies), the number are even more astronomical.    About 85 Million sperm are produced each and every day in each testicle — beginning at sexual maturity.  With each ejaculation, about 200 – 600 Million sperm cells are released.  The rest die and are absorbed into the male body.

Getting the Egg and Sperm Together

When a human sperm and egg combine (fertilization), cell division begins, but they are not yet anywhere close to being able to sustain the growth that is needed to become a baby.  During the next 5-6 days, the fertilized egg begins division and is referred to as a blastocyst.

“Once the embryo reaches the blastocyst stage, approximately five to six days after fertilization, it hatches out of its zona pellucida and begins the process of implantation in the uterus.

In nature, 50 percent of all fertilized eggs are lost before a woman’s missed menses. In the in vitro fertilization (IVF) process as well, an embryo may begin to develop but not make it to the blastocyst stage — the first stage where those cells destined to become the fetus separate from those that will become the placenta. The blastocyst may implant but not grow, or the blastocyst may grow but stop developing before the two week time at which a pregnancy can be detected. The receptivity of the uterus and the health of the embryo are important for the implantation process.” [reference]

Roughly a week after fertilization, the blastocyst (more correctly, about 50% of the blastocysts, since this many do not survive to this point) will attach itself to the uterus.  At this point, still a great percentage of embryo will not “make it” and will stop developing for one reason or another.

Quick Summary Of Conception, Life and Death Up To This Stage (One week) Of Development

  • Only a VERY, very small percentage of female eggs survive to be fertilized
  • Only a VERY, very small percentage of human sperm survive to fertilize an egg
  • Only a VERY, very  small percentage of fertilized eggs develop sufficiently to become a viable embryo in the uterus
  • NONE of the lost “life” to this point is considered to be a human “death”.
  • Virtually ALL of the lost “life” to this point is the result of either “chance” or “God“, not planned parenthood of any kind

With this said, I will let these fetuses continue to grow while I move on to my next related topic relating to these…..

LDS Belief In The Eternal Purpose of Mortal Life

In order to see at which point in the development of new (human) life it becomes in the least bit possible for mortal life to have fully met the conditions of its existence, I now turn to those who feel that they know why life exists.  These are generally going to be LDS authorities, but other religious leaders will also be used since many religious leaders feel that they know the seriousness of human life and the penalties for stopping human life — as in abortion, murder or somewhere in between.

Like all religious leaders, the LDS leaders claim that there is “something” special about human life that is not present in non-human life.  Human life involves both a physical body and a spiritual body.  These two together are a “soul”.

D & C 88:15 And the spirit and the body are the soul of man.

The LDS teaching manuals stress the simplicity of the “Plan of Salvation”.  Typically they will say, “Why did we come to earth? (To obtain a physical body, partake of necessary ordinances, learn, strive for perfection, keep the commandments, and be tried and tested.)”

Note that there are six separate and important parts of a mortal life on earth:

  1. To obtain a physical body

  2. Partake of necessary ordinances (like baptism)

  3. Learn

  4. Strive for perfection

  5. Keep the commandments

  6. To be tried and tested so that we can return to our Heavenly Father

In the LDS view, we need a physical body as an essential part of God’s plan.  Due to Adam’s transgression, even though we have a body, we will not have the power to return to God unless Jesus Christ freely gave his sinless life. for us.  After we have a physical body, then we also need to have necessary ordinances.  Those who cannot be baptized, however (because they are too young, die without knowing Christ or otherwise do not accept Christ in mortality) will have this ordinance work done for them in LDS temples.  This includes those of other religions and those who never hear of Christ during their mortal life.  [For the holocaust controversy related to this issue, click HERE]

 

Spirit Children Need Mortal Bodies

Since God gave “spiritual birth” to all human spirits, each one now needs a mortal, physical body in order to fulfill the eternal plan made in heaven.  Even though only 2/3 of God’s spirit children were valiant enough to gain mortal bodies, all of these billions and billions of spirits need bodies to go into so that they can experience mortality and learn to follow Jesus’ commandments — to see if they will “obey” God while out of His presence.   These spirit children stay in a “Pre-Existence” until they can be born and receive the breath of life, as mentioned in Genesis 2:7.

Does the biological condition of a fertilized egg (zygote) or a blastocyst qualify for the condition of having a mortal body?  Well, certainly, it is mortal — in that it can and will eventually die.  But it does not yet (according to LDS doctrine) become a person, until it is born and has breath — and no spirit has entered into it to reside and not leave.

Should this fertilized egg, blastocyst or embryo never be born, I can not see how any interpretation of the scriptures (particularly by LDS leaders) could claim that the spirit body has now forfeited its chance to mature to an adult mortal.  Since getting to the stage of being born happens much less than 50% of the time [and since this is caused most often by hormones, poor genetic development or other inherent physical development problem] the still-awaiting spirit children simply remain in a waiting stage for their turn on earth.    This status of a yet-to-be-born baby as NOT being inalterably assigned to a body till it is born is confirmed by the LDS scripture, The Book of Mormon.  It claimed:

“And it came to pass that he cried mightily unto the Lord all that day; and behold, the voice of the Lord came unto him, saying:

“Lift up your head and be of good cheer; for behold, the time is at hand, and on this night shall the sign be given, and on the morrow come I into the world, to show unto the world that I will fulfill all that which I have caused to be spoken by the mouth of my holy prophets.

“Behold, I come unto my own, to fulfil all things which I have made known unto the children of men from the foundation of the world, and to do the will, both of the Father and of the Son—of the Father because of me, and of the Son because of my flesh. And behold, the time is at hand, and this night shall the sign be given.  [3 Nephi 1:12-13]

From this scripture, it can be concluded that the Christ child, who was about to be born, however would not be permanently assigned to this body until “tomorrow” — when he would be physically born.  This is the same way that the rest of the spirits are to be considered, if you believe in this LDS scripture.

In the LDS tradition and religion, the “spirit children” awaiting to be born will get their chance to be born, no matter what we do.  Their opportunity to get a mortal body will not be stopped simply because a spontaneous abortion happened because of innate deformities, malformed eggs in a uterus or other problem.  [If this WERE the case, then MOST spirit children would never get the breath of life that happens at birth, nor would they live long enough to be tried, tested, tempted or baptized.  This would then stop the purpose of life in the first place.]

When Does a Newly Born Child Become Viable?

Human babies are totally helpless at birth.  It will be several years before they can live on their own.  Many infants are born with absolutely NO chance to live more than a few minutes, hours or days.  Many have genetic deformities that are un-fixable.  I cannot believe that such infants have met the full purpose of being born when such a situation exists.  I do not have the wisdom, however, to suggest how such things are handled by any God.

Does ALL Life Have a Soul?

We know that feelings and emotions are not unique to humans.  Other animals and birds feel pain, grief, sorrow and loneliness.  Why do we have to treat human life as so unique as to fantasize that only humans have the spark of something special that no other species has?  We have so much more in common with other life that trying to strain to find our differences seems to me to be an exercise in futility.  Research into stem cells is showing us more and more that EVERY cell of EVERY living organism can be copied into an infinite number of identical organisms.  This means that whenever you bleed, the living blood cells that then die are in the millions, yet we don’t conceptualize them as human individuals.

We have a particular fondness for animals that are our pets — or that look like us.  This does not stop some humans from raising animals only to be eaten.  Other animals are raised only to be abused.

Just this past week, not more than 40 miles from my home in Idaho, there were three people who were murdered by an as-yet unknown killer.  In the yard were found 64 dogs along with considerable evidence that the dogs were being raised for the sole purpose of fighting each other. [LINK]  Why do some people treat life so casually?  In my thinking, we should show reverence for all life, not just humans (or human embryos).

I have to wonder what in the world is happening with our reverence for life.  The phrase, “Reverence For Life“, was initially coined and discussed by the theologian/physician/philosopher named Albert Schweitzer.  He was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1952 for his philosophy about reverence for life.  [Interestingly -- and ironically -- an LDS conference talk was given in 1985 by Russell M. Nelson with this title, but not only failed to credit Albert Schweitzer for the plagiarism of the famous term, but also talked exclusively about abortion -- thereby twisting its meaning to the world.]

As Albert Schweitzer discussed the phrase, Reverence For Life, he described its meaning in this way:

“Reverence for Life is a philosophy that says that the only thing we’re really sure of is that we live, and want to go on living. And this is something that we share with everything else that lives – from elephants to blades of grass. So we are brothers and sisters to all living things, and nothing else, neither race nor colour nor religion nor sex, should be more important than this one deepest, most extraordinary thing connecting us.

The whole world, indeed the whole universe, has evolved to give us life – you and me and the rest of the living world.

But only humans are aware of all this. This is some responsibility. Because we also have the ability to neglect, to destroy, to cause suffering and death. And indeed some suffering and death is inevitable. Even vegetarians can only survive by eating some living thing.

Reverence for Life is not some cranky and impossible commandment. It just says we must be aware of what we’re doing.

We must take responsibility for what we do when we harvest a crop of grain, when we eat the bread that’s made from it, when we grill a steak, when we kill a dangerous insect.

The key is awareness. Which makes us more alive.

For life is extraordinary. Every scientific advance tells us this. We now know the billion to one chances ever since the Big Bang that have enabled life to develop and then to survive on this planet, and the extreme rarity of it in the universe. More than ever, we have good reason to feel reverence for it.”

Now, These Are My Thoughts

We can eat meat — by grilling a juicy steak.  We can swat a nuisance fly or mosquito — thereby ending its life.  We can kill game — by hunting or by raising animals for food.  But we need to be MUCH MORE AWARE of what we are doing and show more compassion and reverence for ALL life.  We are all related.  Humans are extremely important in the scheme of things, but we are not so supreme that we can forget or mismanage other life here on earth.

If we mistreat animals, abuse the wonderful life around us FOR NO OVERWHELMING REASON, we are doing something very bad.   Nuff said.

Human babies are not to be considered “being born” till they are born — and breathe.  It is not murder to have an abortion, but it is wrong (exactly HOW wrong, I have no idea).  Abortions should be the decision of the woman and her doctor, not politicians or religious zealots.  Abortions should be safe, available and RARE.

Categories: adoption, divorce contraception, family, hell death, life birth born abortion, Personal history and life story, Religion | Tags: , , , | 4 Comments

The Parable of the Box

Posted on April 3, 2013 by Thayne Andersen

The Parable of The Box
by Anonymous Utahan
There once was a boy who lived all his life with a cardboard box over his head. His parents taught him that he should never take the box off, for doing so was dangerous and foolish. The box protected him from the scary world outside of it.

On the inside of the box, he could make out some letters, and he could see the outlines of the box around him. His world was brown cardboard. His parents taught him to study the inside of the box carefully, for in it was all the wisdom he needed to navigate life. Inside the box was security and safety. Inside the box was reality.

Some of his friends told him that they had taken off the box and life was much better, but he didn’t believe them. His parents made sure he stayed away from these people, who clearly wanted only to hurt their boy.

But as he grew older, he found that he kept bumping into sharp and painful objects that he couldn’t see because of the box. His parents told him that those things weren’t real, that he was safest and happiest inside the box. But each day brought more injury as he seemed to constantly run into painful things.

“Just take the box off so you can see where you’re going”, said his friends.

“No! You can’t! You’ll hurt yourself, and you might even die!” warned his parents.

After too many painful days, he made up his mind to see what was out there on the other side of the box. The light hurt his eyes briefly, but after a moment, he could see colors, and trees, and sky. It was more beautiful than anything he had ever imagined.

He looked around and saw his friends, who smiled at him and welcomed him to a better world.

And then he saw them. His parents and friends came groping toward him, boxes on their heads.

He called out to them, “Take the boxes off! You’ll see that there’s so much more out here! Trust me!”

But his parents told him sadly, “We have failed as parents. All we ever wanted was for you to be happy, and now you’ve rejected us and everything we hold dear. Please, son, put the box back on, for us. You’ll see that we know what’s best”

“But Mom, Dad, it’s so beautiful out here, and the world is full of possibilities. Can’t you just lift the box, if only for a moment? You’ll see that I’m telling you the truth.”

His parents turned sadly and told their friends, “We have lost our son. Let this be a lesson to you. This is what happens when you take off the box.”

And, turning, they groped their way slowly – away from the shining sun.

By Fred W. Anson

Categories: Uncategorized | Tags: | 2 Comments

Fairbanks, Alaska: 1990-1999; Firearms

Posted on March 21, 2013 by Thayne Andersen

It has been nearly a month since writing my last post on this blog.  I need to get off my duff and share a little more of my life.

The decade of 1990-1999 was an interesting one for me.  I worked as the Clinical Director of an outpatient drug and alcohol treatment program at Ft Wainwright Army post adjacent to Fairbanks, Alaska.

My wife, Ann, got both her Bachelor’s degree in piano performance and her master’s degree in conducting from the University of Alaska.

My son went on a mission for the LDS Church and also got married to the love of his life during this decade.  Ann and I flew everyone to Seattle, then drove a Cadillac rental car through Spokane, WA and down to Boise to get them married in the Boise Temple.  My daughter also went on a mission — to the Philippines.

Throughout most of the decade, I was the Gospel Doctrine teacher for the LDS Sunday School.  I got fired after seven years when a stake councilman complained to the Bishop about my using too many unauthorized source materials for the class conversations.  I have always had difficulty in sticking to the authorized teaching materials that left out so much of our rich history — particularly relating to polygamy and other topics that were not supposed to be talked about.

 Firearms

Over the years, I have owned many different firearms — all without the idea of protecting me or my family from our government — and never with the thought that I might have to shoot someone who is an intruder my house.  They were all bought for hunting, recreation or novelty use.  I have also reloaded many different kinds of gun cartridges and enjoyed the study of ballistics that went along with that hobby.

One of my favorite guns was a handgun named an AMT Automag II.  It was chambered for a .22 magnum rim-fire cartridge that made a lot of noise and only slightly had better ballistics than a standard .22 long rifle cartridge.  It had a good feel to it, but lacked the power of a big handgun.  I used it for protection in Alaska’s back country.  I once owned a .357 Magnum handgun and after using it for a couple years, decided that it was absolutely NO use for bear protection and from then on only took a big rifle with me while out in Alaska wild country.

This gun got me in a bit of trouble.  In 1990, I took a fishing trip to the Nushagak River from Fairbanks.  Instead of heading out without any kind of weapon, I decided at the last minute to throw the Automag into one of my bags with some fishing lures.  I forgot which bag I put it in and used that one as my carry-on as I boarded the Alaska Airlines flight to Dillingham.  My bad!!  The pistol set off the warning bells at check-in and the TSA officer confiscated it (He nearly confiscated ME!).  This was in the days prior to 9/11, but it was still a No-No to carry  guns when boarding a big airline jet — even if you are going fishing in a part of Alaska known for having a lot of aggressive bears.  It took me nearly 18 months and a lot of paperwork to get my gun back.

My Ideas Regarding The 2nd Amendment

I have been doing a lot of thinking about the role of the 2nd Amendment (basically gun ownership).  I have owned guns of all kinds and descriptions for most of my life, from B-B guns to large bore rifles and shotguns.  I don’t see gun ownership as required in order to be a good citizen of the US, nor do I see the importance of protecting gun manufacturers from liability when something bad happens with guns.  Guns are dangerous.  They were made to be dangerous.  Any kind of lapse of thinking when owning a gun can result in bad things happening.  This was not so much the case 200 years ago when a gun was fired using a flash pan and when they were loaded using wadding and flint.  Since I owned firearms primarily as a hunting weapon, I had no use for automatic loading guns — either semi-automatic or fully automatic weapons.  I felt that having that kind of option tended to make a hunter less careful and less accurate.  This combination of rapid firepower plus less preparation resulted in more wounded animals.

 A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Let me make it clear that I am neither a lawyer nor someone who has a lot of experience in interpreting legal topics.  But at the same time, this seems to me to basically do two things:

  1. Declare the importance of owning an “arm” [gun] in a free society
  2. This gun ownership is related to a “well regulated militia” [civilian military]

The idea that our country will at some time have to fight for our freedoms is assumed.  At the same time, firearms and hand-guns are not going to go very far in a modern world to stop those who would try to destroy our country.   An untrained and undisciplined military force has absolutely NO chance to overwhelm a well-trained professional military force in the 21st century.  In my mind, the Constitution did not “intend” that gun ownership be for the purpose of hunting, or sporting, or hobby weekend plinking, or citizen commandos.  It envisioned the use of guns in a “Militia” — which equates to what we call today a “National Guard”.

I agree with the concept in some countries that all men have an obligation to learn military skills and strategy (as in Israel or Switzerland).  Should their country ever need them, they can quickly be mobilized and ready to defend their country.  The idea during the Vietnam War that the rich could and did avoid being called into the military is not right.  The rich have as much to lose in a war as do the poor.  War is intrinsically evil and wrong.  When it is necessary, then all US citizens should bear the cost, in blood, not just the poor.

Our country was “intended” to be defended by a National Guard that could respond to aggression by grabbing the trusty gun over the fireplace and go out like Mel Gibson did in the movie, “The Patriot” (as inaccurately depicted as it was).

But times change.  No citizen militia could defeat an aggressor such as we saw in the last century.  A very costly and technological battleship or jet airplane could never  be maintained or developed  by one person, one family, one village, city or state.  Even if I were to accept the idea that some kind of “God” put the right to own a pistol in the US Constitution, I would have to also accept the idea that that same God could make changes later due to changes in the world.

“Make my day, Punk!!”

We have a lot of inspirational anecdotes where one person has made a change in a violent world.  But one person — even with an AR-15 could not have stopped the killing fields of Cambodia, the starvation of Russia or the racial hatred of the Holocaust.  Often, one person without a gun has made much more of a difference than a lone gunman like Harry Callahan (played by Clint Eastwood) in the movie “Dirty Harry” above.

When we think that owning a gun is more powerful to our safety or the safety of the world than basic education, health care and knowledge of history, we are VERY dangerously misinformed.  The idea that Adolph Hitler outlawed guns is an important issues that is basically wrong [reference].

Suicide

If you were to ask the average person in the US if suicide should be legalized — or euthanasia should be legalized, they would probably respond negatively.  It is not in the program to have “pro-Life” standards that also freely allow people to kill themselves.  As of today, only three of the fifty states, however,  allow assisted suicide (Montana, Oregon and Washington).  Yet in practice, the ownership of guns makes it easy for someone who is otherwise healthy to kill himself.  In all states, the idea of “suicide by cop” is practiced [where a suicidal person might point a gun at police, causing the police to respond by killing the person with the gun].

Most of the deaths in the US that are caused by guns are not homicides.  They are suicides. There are 40% more suicide deaths caused by guns than homicide deaths.  This amounts to roughly 53 deaths PER DAY in the US.  If we are serious about controlling deaths, we have to face the fact that gun deaths are lethal, normally quick, impulsive and irreversible.

Categories: Credo, family | Tags: , , , | Leave a comment

An LDS Stake President – What Is He?

Posted on February 20, 2013 by Thayne Andersen

One of my favorite blogs online is/was a blog that claimed to be written by an LDS Stake President.  It was http://stakepresident.blogspot.com/  He called himself “President Paternoster“.  He claimed to be the LDS Stake President for  a Stake of the LDS Church in Ireland [but few readers really believed that].  His stated purpose in blogging online was to strengthen the testimony of members of the LDS church everywhere.  He is/was the only Stake President with the balls to write a commentary and opinion blog online.  In this, he was unique.

There was something strangely familiar about him.  He knew his scripture backwards and forwards.  He knew the LDS magazines and journals.   He read and followed instructions that came for the “Brethren” so that he could govern the members of the church.

At the end of 2012, he died, peacefully I hope.  One post has appeared after his death that was written by his wife, but it is not yet clear if she will be allowed to pick up his mantle of responsibility to continue to write for his blog.

The calling of “Stake President” is a unique one.  As far as I know, the LDS church is the only church that has people called to this position.  (“6 We believe in the same aorganization that existed in the Primitive Church, namely, apostles, bprophets, cpastors, dteachers, eevangelists, and so forth- no mention of Stake Presidents here.) [Articles of Faith, #6]   A Stake President normally is the presiding leader of the church over 4-8 Wards and Bishoprics.  No one gets a temple reommend without his approval — and his very personal probing questioning.  He presides with counselors and several Stake High Councilmen.

A Stake President is supposed to make sure that the wards are functioning properly, that the finances are collected according to instructions from Salt Lake and that doctrine remains pure  — AND he is not a paid employee of the church, although some of his travel expenses can be paid for him to attend meetings where he is taught the rules himself.  Since this calling typically requires a considerable amount of time, Stake Presidents are normally successful businessmen who have been blessed with a more-than-reasonable amount of financial independence and some free time to pursue religious activities.  This also allows him to expound on the successes that have come to him by paying a full tithe, etc. etc..  It also requires a thorough knowledge of LDS doctrine.  Most Stake Presidents I know are former bishops, missionaries and have generally held many positions where they show that they are not weak in the faith.

A Stake President has the responsibility to hold church “courts” to excommunicate anyone who he thinks is in a state of apostasy — particularly if they have “been through the temple”.

Generally, if a man gets a higher calling in the church, he is then made an official full-time employee of the church and is considered to be a “General Authority“.

Most Stake Presidents I have known over the course of my (nearly 70 years) lifetime are among the best men you will likely know.  While living in Alaska, one Stake President (a modest architect) was considered to be my best friend at the time.  I will always remember him as one of the great men I have known.  He died several years ago of chronic health problems.

A few (a very few), however, I considered to be pompous, self-righteous jerks who held their financial success to being better than the average person.

I have never personally met Mitt Romney, a Mormon who was a Stake President for several years, but I have negative feelings about the way he talks, smiles, and in general conducts himself.

A couple weeks ago, I was sent an email that I was expected to read.  The email was from one of my sisters, but the body of the email was a talk given in a stake conference by a stake president in Utah.  The entire talk is available on the web by clicking HERE.  It lays out the “Signs of the times” according to this man.

I replied to my sister some thoughts of my own about what the Stake President was saying: (My comments are shaded red)

 

The Stake President first claimed that he had no political agenda, but since he is inspired by Christ, he knows that what he is telling his congregation is true, whether we believe it or not.

He explained that 2012 was a year that showed that the world is approaching evil more than ever.  As proof, he claimed:

- Gaza fired missiles on Jerusalem causing heightened unrest in the Middle East

Israel, which has mandatory military service for all young men AND women (combat included) — and requires women and men, gay and straight to serve in their military equally has violated repeatedly the international law to stop new settlements on Palestinian soil.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_law_and_the_Arab%E2%80%93Israeli_conflict
Israel has denied Gaza residents access to even medical supplies.  A case could be made that holds Israel responsible for provoking the missiles strikes.

“In the first six days of Operation Pillar of Defense, the Israelis sent more than 1,500 shells and missiles into Gaza and exploded tons of ordnance, blackening an urban environment that already resembled Baghdad. Despite Israel’s emphasis on surgical strikes, civilian casualties have jerked upward. A family of nine was crushed in a single searing blast. According to Gazan officials, more than 100 Palestinians have been killed in the operation thus far. (Five Israelis have died.)”  Israel, for the most part had a new defensive “weapon” that is called “Iron Dome that intercepted most dangerous Palestinian missiles without hurting anyone.  Much of the technology of this weapon came from funding from the US.

Now, WHICH country is “firing missiles”???  Which country is being terrorist?

“Notwithstanding the nonavailability of same-sex marriage in Israel, unmarried same-sex and heterosexual couples in Israel have equal access to nearly all of the rights of marriage in the form of unregistered cohabitation status, akin to common-law marriage.”

- The Director of the CIA, a man considered to be of the highest moral integrity, resigned due to improprieties and adultery

Yes, this happened.  Before we show this as a “sign of the times”, however, we should note the account of King David in the Bible.  It is an issue that has no beginning and no end.

- The UN Ambassador was instructed by the White House to cover up what happened in Libya, attempting to minimize the deaths of four Americans who were murdered

  If he is claiming that Susan Rice was ordered to do this, he must have evidence that the rest of us do not have — perhaps top secret documents that were available to him that he cannot reveal.  I have yet to find anyone who can tell me exactly what she was “covering up.”

- There was an attempt to raise taxes during the worst economic times since the great depression

He is referring to the scheme called the “fiscal cliff” that expired tax breaks for the wealthiest 1% of the country’s citizens.  This came about by expiring Bush tax cuts, not because the POTUS or Democrats or anyone else wanted this to happen.  [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_tax_cuts]

- Hurricane Sandy, called the “perfect storm” hit the east coast causing great devastation

         There is growing evidence from scientists that more and more of these will happen unless we do something to curb greenhouse gasses.  Some claim that God is trying to punish us for something we did wrong.

- Iran became closer to a nuclear weapon

         Probably.   The rogue country that is “closest” to having a nuclear weapon, however, is North Korea — which has exploded three nuclear devices so far.  Iran has exploded none.

- The use of marijuana was legalized in Washington and Colorado

      Good.  Marijuana is no more dangerous than whiskey or vodka and it is about time we stop using tax dollars for enormous sentences for personal behavior of this kind.  I am speaking as a substance abuse professional as well as a citizen.

- Some states legalized same sex marriage

     In a Constitutional Democracy, a constitution decides what is or is not fair, not voters.  Most State constitutions REQUIRE fairness in treating people the same.

- 23 states began a petition to secede from the nation

   Not really.  Some people in these states rashly signed a petition, but NO state has taken even a small step toward any kind of formal secession.

- Russia strengthened its coalitions with North Korea and Iran

…… and weakened its coalitions with China, Cuba, Venezuela.

- Forces aligned to stop school prayer, but allowed the handing out of birth control

    Not really at all!  These “forces” only keep school and religious leaders from leading school prayers.  Kids and teachers can pray all they want on their own.  We don’t want Mullahs, Rabbis, scientists, athiests or Stake Presidents to come into the schools to teach kids how to pray to Allah, do we?  America is all about fairness and equality.
      Information about birth control MUST be part of education.  Teaching teenagers about their bodies does not equate to “handing out birth control.”

When religious leaders, such as this LDS Stake President, teach so many erroneous and misleading things from our pulpits, it is no wonder that people are leaving orthodox churches en masse!

My readers of this blog will, I hope, see that I am only stating my own opinion.  At this point in my life, I feel that I can express an opinion, can’t I?

Categories: being good, mormon lds skeptic | Tags: , , , | 3 Comments

Eternal Positive Outlook

Posted on February 11, 2013 by Thayne Andersen

We have all seen it — friends who constantly try to put their smiling faces in front of us.  They want us to believe that “Everything Will Work Out for the Better”.  There is no reason to be gloomy because everything happens for a purpose.  God loves you so much that only the best will happen if we only will look for the good in everything.  Keep on the Sunny Side of Life.

This optimism and denial that anything happens by chance is illustrated by the following:

Examples of tragedy that some still see as blessings abound on the internet.  I’m not at all against trying to put a better face on tragedy.  I know from my own experience that blessings CAN come from disappointments, but I do not EVER claim that God makes bad things happen so that other good things can happen “down the road”.

Similarly, things happen by chance — the toss of a coin — or winning a lottery or someone gets in the way of a collapsing building.   For many years, I was willing to accept (not embrace) the possibility that God somehow micro-manages events here on earth.  The scripture makes it clear that the God of the Bible takes notice even when a sparrow falls out of the sky.  But even this can be taken to absurd levels by thinking that “everything” happens for a reason — the death of an ant or a beetle or a krill shrimp.  I got his on Facebook recently:

Things happen.  Shit happens.  We can try to make the best of it, but that does not in any way imply that it was meant to happen or that it happened to make you appreciate other things in life.

I have read many accounts of people who were facing disaster.  Others were dying all around them.  Somehow, they felt a gentle assurance that things would work out all right.  Miraculously, they survived!  Their inevitable conclusion was that they had a guardian angel watching over them or that God answered their prayers — or they still had things to accomplish in mortality.  They wrote about their experience to inspire other to pray and have faith so that they, too, can survive catastrophe.

The problem with this is that we NEVER get the testimony and witness of thousands or millions of others who similarly had faith, who prayed to God to save them — who felt the same assurance that they would survive — only to die!  What of these people?  What of those who felt that they were not, essentially, dead?  They simply knew that they were about to die — but didn’t?

I am of the conclusion that a lot of mental illness and depression is CAUSED by the teaching that “everything happens for a purpose” — because it doesn’t.  Not in real life.

Yesterday, I watched a program on TV about survivors of a terrorist attack on an oil production unit in the Middle East.  All of the men on the program, without exception, said that had no idea why they didn’t die when other workers were killed.  This is commonly referred to as “survivors guilt“.  Why did one person survive the holocaust when so many others didn’t?

When Elie Wiesel wrote about his experience in the death camps of the Nazis, he claimed that it was pure “chance” that he survived.  I think he was right.  Although his survival may have had a positive outcome in bringing these atrocities into daylight and public consciousness, it is simply wrong to say that what happened to him was “for a reason.”

Categories: Optimism | Tags: | 4 Comments

Why I Am A “Skeptic”

Posted on February 1, 2013 by Thayne Andersen

When I felt the urge to write about my thoughts, I went through a significant amount of soul-searching on how to refer to myself.  I knew that I had made significant changes in what and how I believed in issues and topics, but I honestly did not know how to refer to the way I thought.

A lot of meaning is conveyed in words.  Not only did I not know what was going on in my own mind, but most of my friends and relatives had known me in the days that I was a lot more conservative in my politics and religion than I now found myself.  If I shared what I was thinking, how would they react?  Would they hate me?  Shun me? Avoid me all-together?

What could I talk about while feeling good about being as honest a person as I felt that I had been all my life — even while my conclusions about things had changed — in some cases, I had thoughts that were 180 degrees opposite to what I had voiced support for only a few years earlier?

If I can no longer “believe”, did that make me a bad person?  If I am now unable to support bigotry, when I had done so in the past, does that make me an apostate, a heretic, a back-slider, a sinner, or a person who is now no longer a friend and who should now be avoided as someone who is depraved?  Am I an agnostic?  An atheist? A Deist?  A pagan?

I finally settled on the term, SKEPTIC, as a term that is not completely negative, while at the same time puts me in the category of a person who is not going to simply accept incredible, impossible and unbelievable (although some others might believe) events and/or “reality” unless I am presented with more than just claims of the amazing and astounding events and accounts that fool only the gullible.

By identifying myself as a skeptic, however, it may suggest that I don’t believe in anything.  How can a person go through life not believing in anything?  If I allow myself to believe in something NOW, but change that belief whenever new evidence is presented that is convincing, how can I go one living on such a shaky belief system?

Yet, I have to allow myself the flexibility to admit that something is really not reality, but is an illusion not worth spending any more effort in trying to believe?

One of the first issues I remember thinking seriously about (other than religion) was whether or not fluoridation of our drinking water was a good thing to do.   The government was in favor, medical professionals were nearly unanimous in speaking of the benefits to our dental health.  But there were those in my family, schools and church who thought that it was dangerous to tinker with our drinking water.  The argument was that fluoride was a toxic poison and accidents would put large groups of people at risk of poisoning if we allowed this to happen.  Although I do not remember doing a lot of study ab out this issue, I have the conclusion today that the issue was either totally bogus or harmless — and that my own dental health is better because of fluoride in my own drinking water.

The next issue that I struggled with was the germ theory of disease causation.  I have never yet seen a germ.  But people I trust claim that germs are all around me and that my health will be improved simply by washing my hands and being careful of the possibility of germs in the foods that I eat.

Related to germs is the viability of benefiting from inoculations.  I know that there are a large number of people who claim that inoculations are dangerous.  The evidence that I see for myself convinces me that I benefit from inoculations and that our society does as well.  So I get a flu shot every year.  I have had a shingles shot. I have had a pneumonia shot.  I am skeptical, but I have to decide which side of this debate makes the most sense to me and then follow through with it.  In the future, if I find more evidence, I reserve the right (and responsibility) to change my mind on this subject.  I do not try to convince others that I am RIGHT while they are WRONG, but I think the preponderance of evidence is on the side I have followed.

Have “aliens” visited our planet, communicated with humans and left evidence of their visits?  While many people are convinced otherwise, I do not see how this is even remotely possible.  Other explanations for the phenomenon that are used as proof seem to be lacking for me to believe in them.  There is likely existence of life other than on our earth, but they have NOT traveled here for the purpose of communicating with us.

As a SKEPTIC, I feel a responsibility to make up my own mind about many issues — not just believe blindly.  I have a responsibility to use the intelligence I have to make conclusions that are reasonable, and based solidly in fact — but still change my mind if more reasonable facts are shown to exist.

I believe that the explanations of astronomers about the origins of the earth (and us) are more believable than explanations of religious texts.

I believe that the explanation of geology and plate tectonics is the most believable explanation (for me) of the diversity of life here on the earth.

I believe that the explanations of organic evolution is so much more believable so as to make religious explanations totally unbelievable.

I believe that the periodic table of elements best explains chemistry.

I am pretty sure that smoking kills people.  (Boy, THAT was a BIG debate)

I believe that President Kennedy was shot and killed by ONE person — Lee Harvey Oswald.

I believe that the bombing of the US government building in Oklahoma City was NOT done by government agents.

The Oxford Dictionary defines a skeptic as: “One who doubts the validity of what claims to be knowledge in some particular department of inquiry; one who maintains a doubting attitude with reference to some particular question or statement.” And: “A seeker after truth; an inquirer who has not yet arrived at definite convictions.”

My definition of a skeptic is one who: Uses rigorous application of science and reason to test the validity of any and all claims.  Carl Sagan called skepticism as “The fine art of baloney detection.”  He gave his own “baloney detection kit” for you and I to use. [reference]

 

Categories: astronomy, superstition ritual | Tags: , , | 1 Comment

Writing Inspirational Fiction — Does It Apply To The LDS Book of Mormon?

Posted on January 22, 2013 by Thayne Andersen

People have written some pretty unusual books and articles.   In my lifetime, computer programs have improved to the point that translations are as easy as going to Google translate and typing in the text that I need to be translated and Google will detect the language and automatically translate my choice of about 60 different languages.

Writing an entire original book is now about as easy as it can get.   Several sources are available to help an aspiring author to write a book in a relatively short time.   There are two basic categories of books:  Fiction and Non-Fiction.  Fiction can be about virtually anything you want, but Non-fiction is NEVER supposed to be made-up.  Ever!  If a writer makes things up, the entire work is considered to be fiction, even if some truth or facts are not made up.

If a book is written to inspire people — and people ARE inspired, it does not necessarily follow that the claims in the book are either “True” or coming from God.  It is easy to mistake “feeling good” about a topic or a book for something that is historical — just BECAUSE of the feelings of inspiration or happiness that reading it invokes in the reader.  What we WANT to be true is not at all necessarily what IS true historically.

One example are books written by disgraced author and professional bicyclist, Lance Armstrong.  I read his books — “Its Not About The Bike” and “Every Second Counts“.  I felt good about his message of hope and courage to go on in spite of afflictions.  They inspired me.  Last week, Lance Armstrong finally admitted that he is just very good at lying.  Some of the things he wrote about were true, but some were not.  His books are now all in the category of inspirational fiction.  We all like stories of triumph over tragedy, but stories that feed into this kind of thinking are often impossible to validate.  They are also often false — and thereby fit into the category of inspirational fiction.

Another recent book of the genre was a book named, “Three Cups of Tea” by Greg Mortenson.  The fact that the author benefited financially by his account should be a red flag to readers.  It is full of “inaccuracies” (lies) and is highly probable another modern book that falls into the category of “inspirational fiction.”

Some experts would even include the Bible in a list of books that are fiction — because there are many things that are not  supported by enough evidence to claim that they REALLY happened.  President Thomas Jefferson took a pair of scissors and paste and removed the parts of the New Testament that he concluded were simply magic and inaccurate.

By doing this, Jefferson felt that he was making  the Bible more historically accurate and less a book of historical fiction and magic.

“Using the passages he sliced out of his Bibles, Jefferson created a new book, which he called, “The Philosophy of Jesus of Nazareth.” He had it bound but he never published it, and he told only a handful of close friends about it. His copy—the only copy that ever existed—later disappeared and is now lost to history.

But sixteen years later, he created another. In 1820, retired from politics and living at Monticello, Jefferson sat down again, at the age of seventy-seven, to edit the Bible. He purchased six Bibles—two in English, two in French, and two containing both Latin and Greek—and cut them up, creating a second edited version of the New Testament, in four languages.

In this book, he kept the words of Jesus and some of his deeds, but left out the miracles and any suggestion that Jesus is God. The virgin birth is gone. So is Jesus walking on water, multiplying the loaves and fishes, and raising Lazarus from the dead. Jefferson’s version ends with Jesus’ burial on Good Friday. There is no resurrection, no Easter Sunday. Jefferson called this version “The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth.”” [Reference]

There is an annotated Skeptics Bible that points out detail by detail the inconsistencies in the Bible.

 —————–

There have been many books that have been written about religious topics.  Many are claimed to have been written by revelation or inspiration.  The author sometimes was in a religious trance and saw visions or described dreams from God that they claimed to have had.  Sometimes the author used a seer stone or other item to help with the task of writing.

 Joseph Smith was not by far the only man to have claimed to have written a book by inspiration or revelation — or who claimed that he could dictate long passages while using a seer stone.

Some of these writers wrote their books while the author was drunk, on drugs or in the throws of a religious  trance of some kind,  Automatic writing or psychography is writing which the writer claims to be produced from a subconscious, and/or external and/or spiritual source without conscious awareness of the content.  Such was the case of many spiritualists in the 19th century.

The conclusion that Joseph Smith Jr. planned the dictation and thought it through before dictating to a scribe is validated by the Doctrine and Covenants, Section 9.  He told Oliver Cowdrey that translation was more than just looking at ancient writings and coming up with an inspired translation.

 7 Behold, you have not understood; you have supposed that I would give it unto you, when you took no thought save it was to ask me.

 8 But, behold, I say unto you, that you must study it out in your mind; then you must ask me if it be right, and if it is right I will cause that your bosom shall burn within you; therefore, you shall feel that it is right.

 9 But if it be not right you shall have no such feelings, but you shall have a stupor of thought that shall cause you to forget the thing which is wrong; therefore, you cannot write that which is sacred save it be given you from me.

 10 Now, if you had known this you could have translated; nevertheless, it is not expedient that you should translate now.

 11 Behold, it was expedient when you commenced; but you feared, and the time is past, and it is not expedient now;

 

When we use chronological inconsistencies to apply things TODAY to things that are in a different time period, it is called “anacronistic thinking“.  The way that Joseph Smith claimed to translate is not at all what we would accept today as a valid way to translate anything, since he claimed to be translating from a language that did not exist into English.

The best I can conclude is that many people — even millions — get inspiration from reading the Book of Mormon.  This, however, in no way implies that it is historical in nature.  Most evidence shows that it is fiction — fiction that inspires many people.  But fiction, nevertheless.

Categories: languages tower, Marriage, Miracles, mormon lds skeptic, Religion | Tags: , , , | 1 Comment