Obedience

To obey is better than sacrifice... (1 Samuel 15:22)

And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?  (Luke 6:46)

If ye love me, keep my commandments. (John 14:15)

If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love. (John 15:10) 

I, the Lord, am bound when ye do what I say; but when ye do not what I say, ye have no promise. (Doctrine and Covenants 82:10)

When we obtain any blessing from God, it is by obedience to that law upon which it is predicated. (Doctrine and Covenants 130:21)

If my obedience to God is an expression of love, what does that say about my disobedience?

We may rationalize our disobedience, but we cannot escape the consequences.

"Gay" in the News: Corporate Extortion

...Unless its not.  Certainly nothing deemed to merit "gay" disapproval is "okay".  Anything else requires permission with a note from your mother.

An interesting glimpse at homosexual advocacy and activism this week.

It seems that those who opposed California's Proposition 8 kept careful track of those who made donations to the campaign. Activists nursing a long-standing grudge keep those who represent such opposition to their agenda under their thumb, and many of them have been subject to popular censure for presuming to hold the "wrong" opinion.

Following the example of Apple, the NFL, and other outspoken corporate interests in the Arizona "no gays allowed" legislative argument, other corporations have joined the "gay" activism fray.  Difficult to say whether this move stems from enthusiastic ideologues in the boardroom or cynical concession to the perception of popular sentiment.

Their sights focused this week on the Mozilla group, and newly elected CEO Brendan Eich, who is now being cast as an enemy to the cause.  Some other companies are now recommending a "gay"-cot of Mozilla products such as the popular Firefox browser, because they have "outed" the CEO as a homophobe.

 
One of the companies pointing fingers at Mozilla apparently displays the following to Firefox users attempting to enter their web site:

"Those who seek to deny love and instead enforce misery, shame and frustration are our enemies, and we wish them nothing but failure."

To this I would like to add my sad acknowledgement to all those so vigilant in continuing to hound people who supported Proposition 8, and offer them my own sympathies. Your obsession with your own "gender identity" (whatever you think that might be) has absolutely nothing to do with the browser you prefer.  And if you choose not to use Firefox, I think it is too bad, because it is a very good product.  Seems to me that's what all this comes down to - vociferously demanding the right to make bad choices, and denying that consequences ever hurt you or others.

To all those who are deceived into believing they can find happiness in living a miserable lie, I offer my sincere condolences, and pray that they might be led to some way to escape from the trap of evil consequences of their undignified shameful indulgence in an unhealthy and promiscuous destructive lifestyle, before they contract some horrible STD.

Another discussion in the news here.

In the latest development, Brendan Eich has reportedly resigned from the position as Mozilla CEO.  News and comments from the Heritage Foundation here.  More from Heritage Foundation here.
More from Yahoo News here.

Apparently Eich was one of the original founders of Mozilla, and was involved in promoting the success of the company for 20 years.

Once again it is manifest that homosexual advocates do not believe in freedom of speech for anyone who presumes to disagree with them.  The hypocrites demonstrate that they cannot tolerate resistance or criticism, and those who speak against them will receive retribution.

I cannot understand why laws against "hostile work environment" did not protect Eich from the unfair discrimination of his own employees.  Apparently these harassment statutes are only intended to have an effect in one direction.

All that said, I have the suspicion that Eich's resignation is not depriving him of rewards from his contribution to the success of Mozilla.  I would imagine that he parts company from Mozilla with a substantial share of the financial profits.  For one with strong passive-aggressive tendencies like me, that would be the ultimate departure. 

"Gay" in the News: Kansas Overturns Religious Rights

Kansas protesters have success rejecting a religious rights bill.  Perhaps it was legislative overreach.  But nothing compared to the potential impact of federal judges overturning democratic initiatives.

Though this protester's placard represents sound advice, it is hardly definitive.

I love my mom, I even live in her house.  I also love my 1995 Toyota 4-Runner SUV.  I love furry little kittens and bunny rabbits.  I adore little children.

But we don't really have any desire to marry.  Honest.  Maybe there's a bit more to this issue than the sound bytes and slogans can communicate.

"Love" is much more than indulgence of the biological imperative.  And marriage is a "gestalt" that means so much more than "I am physically attracted to you and want to share your bed for a while".

"Gay" in the News: Jesus Proclaims Love

And now we are informed that the doctrines of Christianity are responsible for "gay marriage".   The suggestions don't only sound ludicrous, like most such convoluted thinking, they ARE ludicrous.

This article appears wont to celebrate Jesus as "the Gayest Deity Ever!", promoting the "democratic" principle of universal human equivalence and interchangeability to create a rationale for homosexual behavior.  After all, we know that Jesus mostly hung out with a bunch of guys, and talked all the time about "love".   So he must have been a "gay" advocate!  The only problem seems to be that it has very little basis in reality.

The emphasis appears to be trying to persuade that social normalization and acceptance of homosexual behavior is inevitable.  Ignoring the fact that this appears rather as a propaganda effort popularized in the media, lacking general popular support.  The efforts to legalize "gay marriage" have been turned down everywhere in the democratic process, the "cause" only forwarded by legalistic judgements and force.

Utah Traditional Marriage Support

Today in Salt Lake City, supporters of homosexual marriage staged a protest rally at the Utah State Capitol. There were reports in the Deseret News and the SL Trib. 

I for one have had enough of watching this happen without adding my own voice to the political scene. I oppose the legalization of homosexual "marriage", I support the promotion of traditional marriage between a man and a woman, and am not convinced that these practices violate any man's rights or constitute any compromises to personal freedom. We are not obligated to sit quiet and allow our own rights to be compromised, just because we constitute the greatest majority in Utah. We can no longer tolerate being silenced by the angry demands of a few.

I have expressed my beliefs and concerns on this blog page, and would welcome any ideas or suggestions that might contribute to this cause. I believe it is time for a public rally to express the beliefs that the majority of good people uphold in Utah and around this great country.

Homosexual supporters and activists reported gathering more than 58,000 signatures on petitions - some reportedly even from Utah - asking the Governor not to appeal a District Court decision legalizing homosexual "marriage".

"I care about love, just like the rest of you, that's why I did this", one of the organizers explained.

The reports actually indicate that up to 1,000 supporters attended the rally at the Capitol.

Homosexuals continue their assault on traditional marriage with the demand that same-sex unions be legally regarded as equivalent to traditional marriage between a man and woman.  Legal challenge of the Utah state law that establishes traditional marriage by statute is what brought this situation forward.  By their own idiosyncratic definition, they justify perverted behavior by perverting the true meaning of "love".

The term obviously means different things to different people. In the October 2013 General Conference, Elder Dallin H. Oaks reiterated traditional LDS doctrine - our first love is commanded to be for God, and we are commanded to have no other Gods.

Master, which is the great commandment in the law?

Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.

This is the first and great commandment. (Matthew 22:36-37)

Jesus declared plainly his definition of love.

If ye love me, keep my commandments. (John 14:15)

Elder Oaks elaborates.

Our twelfth article of faith states our belief in being subject to civil authority and “in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.”  But man’s laws cannot make moral what God has declared immoral. Commitment to our highest priority—to love and serve God—requires that we look to His law for our standard of behavior.  For example, we remain under divine command not to commit adultery or fornication even when those acts are no longer crimes under the laws of the states or countries where we reside.  Similarly, laws legalizing so-called “same-sex marriage” do not change God’s law of marriage or His commandments and our standards concerning it.  We remain under covenant to love God and keep His commandments and to refrain from serving other gods and priorities—even those becoming popular in our particular time and place.

Elder Oaks' counsel suggests to me that the citizens of the State of Utah have  obligation to legally promote God's standard of morality.  This would include participation and support like that organized for the California Prop 8 campaign.

I have written here previously about legislating morality.  Latter-day Saints are prompted by their ideals and their doctrine to support and promote laws that reflect our understanding of God's laws and commandments. 

I believe it is a time to stand for something.  Millions of Utah citizens have made sacred covenants with God to uphold righteous causes.   Perhaps a representative sample of supporters should organize to gather in Salt Lake and other civic centers around Utah, to counterbalance the expression of those few hundred at this "gay" rally.  What is at stake may well impinge upon the future welfare of our families.

We are people of peace. We are followers of the Christ who was and is the Prince of Peace. But there are times when we must stand up for right and decency, for freedom and civilization, just as Moroni rallied his people in his day to the defense of their wives, their children, and the cause of liberty (see Alma 48:10) (Gordon B. Hinckley, October 2001 General Conference address).

I will attempt to develop this idea further.  Any helpful suggestions would be appreciated.

Obedience

Some have the mistaken idea that the commandments of God constrict freedom and personal growth.  Not so.  God gives commandments for our benefit. They are loving instructions for our happiness and for our physical and spiritual well-being.

Jesus counselled his disciples to be obedient:

And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?  (Luke 6:46)

If ye love me, keep my commandments. (John 14:15)

If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love. (John 15:10)

Joseph Smith taught about obedience:

There is a law, irrevocably decreed in heaven before the foundations of this world, upon which all blessings are predicated—and when we obtain any blessing from God, it is by obedience to that law upon which it is predicated. (Doctrine and Covenants 130:20-21)

In a recent conference address, President Monson taught:

A knowledge of truth and the answers to our greatest questions come to us as we are obedient to the commandments of God. (President Thomas S. Monson, Obedience Brings Blessings)

President Uchtdorf counsels to be aware of the beautiful blessings that blossom and grow out of obedience:

Let us not walk the path of discipleship with our eyes on the ground, thinking only of the tasks and obligations before us. Let us not walk unaware of the beauty of the glorious earthly and spiritual landscapes that surround us.

The “what” and “how” of obedience mark the way and keep us on the right path. The “why” of obedience sanctifies our actions, transforming the mundane into the majestic. It magnifies our small acts of obedience into holy acts of consecration. (President Dieter F. Uchtdorf, Forget Me Not)

This illustration of the cycle of obedience models the result of observing the commandments of God.   Obedience brings blessings to us, which makes us happier and motivates further obedience.

Despite the popular confusion of this idea, there has never been the slightest ambiguity.  Obedience is always positive.  God has never commanded us to disobey any of his commandments.

Cecil B. DeMille, producer of the epic The Ten Commandments, dramatizing the life of Moses the Lawgiver, spoke at a BYU commencement in 1957.  He made these observations:

We are too inclined to think of law as something merely restrictive—something hemming us in.  We sometimes think of law as the opposite of liberty.  But that is a false conception. That is not the way that God’s inspired prophets and lawgivers looked upon the law. Law has a twofold purpose.  It is meant to govern and it is also meant to educate...

 ...We cannot break the Ten Commandments.  We can only break ourselves against them—or else, by keeping them, rise through them to the fullness of freedom under God.  God means us to be free. With divine daring, He gave us the power of choice.  (Cecil B. DeMille, BYU Commencement Address)

Jesus taught his disciples, "If ye love me, keep my commandments."(John 14:15)

During the Last Supper, Jesus Christ taught His disciples how they could show their love for Him.

We manifest our love for the Lord by keeping His commandments.

October 2009 General Conference: Love and Law

Elder Dallin H. Oaks of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles spoke concerning the connection between love and God's commanments.
Confusing between love and law.
Why does God love us so much, and why do we desire that love?

God’s choicest blessings depend upon our obedience to God’s laws and commandments.

In teaching and reacting to their children, parents have many opportunities to apply these laws and commandments.

Living Together in Love

I am still trying to find the fullest measure of love and life. My choices don't please everyone. I realize that, but it is a catch-22 situation.

The harder I try to please certain others, the less satisfied I am. They define their own arbitrary rules for things that seem axiomatic and standard to me. Truth is not situational or a matter of convenience. That which is true one moment must necessarily be true the next, all else being equal.

I am an advocate of Thumper's Rule -- "IF YOU CAN'T SAY SOMTHIN' NICE, DON'T SAY ANYTHIN' AT ALL".

I will refuse any posts or comments that flagrantly violate Thumper's Rule. So, if you choose to violate it, start your own lone and lonesome blog, if you please.

Thank you kindly.

Banana Bread II

What do I explain to my young sons?

These self-identified homosexual men claim to love each other, and bishop Buttars' cruel church is attempting to prevent them from formalizing their love as a relationship, just as men and women have been doing for ages. They want nothing more extraordinary than recognition of their love for each other, and the special things it qualifies other couples in that relation for.

Is there any flaw in this argument?

What reason do I tell my sons that my church continues to oppose such unions?

Is it really bishop Buttars fault?

What does banana bread have to do with it?

To be continued....

October 2008 General Conference: Answering our accusers in the Savior’s way

I am somewhat unhappy about Elder Hales conference talk on how to respond to dissidents and those who would make accusations.

Elder Hales speaks against responding in kind. His counsel is:

When we do not retaliate—when we turn the other cheek and resist feelings of anger—we too stand with the Savior. We show forth His love, which is the only power that can subdue the adversary and answer our accusers without accusing them in return.

I can tell you, nothing could be more difficult, for me. When I hear attacks against the things I know are true, my first impulse is always to fight back. I will have to change my responses to conform to Elder Hales' counsel. Elder Hales further counsels:

This is especially important in our interactions with members of other Christian denominations. Surely our Heavenly Father is saddened—and the devil laughs—when we contentiously debate doctrinal differences with our Christian neighbors.

I am made especially uncomfortable at this suggestion. Let me not be found guilty of making the devil laugh. The mental image of demonic laughter haunts me. It is very unpleasant to think of myself this way.


He goes on to extend this idea further:

This is not to suggest that we compromise our principles or dilute our beliefs. We cannot change the doctrines of the restored gospel, even if teaching and obeying them makes us unpopular in the eyes of the world. Yet even as we feel to speak the word of God with boldness, we must pray to be filled with the Holy Ghost (see Acts 4:29, 31). We should never confuse boldness with Satan’s counterfeit: overbearance (see Alma 38:12). True disciples speak with quiet confidence, not boastful pride.

This part serves as answer to some of my misgivings about pride. There is a significant distinction between the kind of pride that lends us quiet confidence and the quality that leads to the hubris of boastful bragging. We can be forewarned by the kind of attitude our proud feelings lead us to.

Elder Hales further distinguishes between confident speaking and boastful pride:

As true disciples, our primary concern must be others’ welfare, not personal vindication. Questions and criticisms give us an opportunity to reach out to others and demonstrate that they matter to our Heavenly Father and to us. Our aim should be to help them understand the truth, not defend our egos or score points in a theological debate. Our heartfelt testimonies are the most powerful answer we can give our accusers. And such testimonies can only be born in love and meekness.

Thus our personal motive for acting is a key to knowing if we are moved by charity and genuine concern for others, or if our acts are self-serving and centered upon our own interest.

Elder Hales makes a good recommendation for those who are confused like me, and seek some guideline for personal behavior:

We should be like Edward Partridge, of whom the Lord said, “His heart is pure before me, for he is like unto Nathanael of old, in whom there is no guile” (Doctrine and Covenants 41:11). To be guileless is to have a childlike innocence, to be slow to take offense and quick to forgive.

I will have to consider this idea further. It certainly sheds some light on my questions about pride -- but perhaps not in the way that pleases me. I need to change my thinking somewhat to accommodate. Not easy advice to follow.

Wickedness never was happiness

In discussion elsewhere, someone asserted that acts of sexual transgression bring them a measure of joy. In reply, it was responded that this "free love" argument is invalid, as there are acts we agree bring some people "joy", yet are unequivocally wrong.

This is such an obvious point that it is pointless to belabor. Those who are offended by the idea that "wickedness never was happiness" cannot allow themselves to see this vital point without accepting that they are responsible and accountable for their own acts, and their own reconciliation with God. So often, they seek to find someone or something else to blame for their unhappiness. Thus the popular claim from these "victims" that the church excludes or punishes those guilty of sexual transgression.

It is also obvious that only overtly sexual behavior is proscribed by commandment, and that such behavior is largely irrelevant to the most significant acts of true love. We are not compelled to copulate with everyone or everything we have real feelings of love for -- everyone recognizes that this would be simply a ridiculous caricature of real love. By divine commandment, the biological components of sexual behavior are only appropriate within narrow boundaries. Otherwise they become a vehicle for the perversion and betrayal of real love.

This is not specific to advocates for normalizing perverted behavior -- it applies to everyone. God is truly no respecter of persons. Those of us who don't fit the cookie-cutter Mormon stereotype know this from personal experience, and we bear our own burdens in this regard. It is entirely specious to argue that the rules are unfair simply because some feel strongly compelled to break them.