In case you couldn't tell, that was supposed to be a play on words. I did pulled a funny which would make a lot more sense if any of you knew Bruce Hunt (which I imagine one or two out of my three or four readers do). He would say things like, "Two Hmongs don't make a White", and other horrible puns like that. So, sorry.
Anyway, on to the topic. Thanks to a text I received from a mission buddy last night, I discovered that Clint Eastwood directed and starred in a movie in which the plot centers around his interactions with a Hmong gang in his neighborhood. It looks crazy intense. See for yourself:
Saturday, October 25, 2008
Friday, October 10, 2008
An Appalling Proposition
I honestly do not understand what some people are thinking! This morning I grabbed a Daily Universe (BYU's Newspaper) and flipped to the Readers' Forum (the section that accepts letters from students) which is usually my favorite section of the paper. Some letters are funny, because the issue they discuss is ridiculous, and others are absolutely horrifying. This was one such letter:
"I am appalled at the number of BYU students campaigning for the California initiative. The onslaught of flyers has left my stomach churning. I wish these students could see how voting for Proposition 8 simply hurts the Church. It hurts those men and women withinn the Church who struggle with same-sex attraction. It hurts our image. It turns people against the Church. Joseph Smith once said he teaches his people correct principles and allows them to govern themselves. We have been taught the correct principle regarding same-sex attraction and acting on those tendencies. Now let's try out a little agency and govern ourselves while allowing others to make their own decisions without government interference."
That made me sick. I couldn't believe that some people, BYU students nonetheless, could believe that we (the Church, actually) should just roll over and allow the world to run its own course without any correction! That is ridiculous! And so, I immediately send a reply letter to the Universe:
"The letter entitled 'Proposition 8' last Friday was from a student declaring that she was 'appalled' at the campaigning of BYU students encouraging California citizens to vote in favor of Proposition 8. She argued that such campaigning, encouraged by the First Presidency mind you, hurts the image of the Church and those that struggle with same-sex attraction. She concluded by saying, 'Let's try out a little agency and govern ourselves while allowing others to make their own decisions without government interference.' I'm continually fascinated and horrified that so many Latter-day Saints do not understand the gravity of this issue and the consequences that will ensue if we '[allow] others to make their own decisions without government interference.'
"Perhaps this student does not understand the role that a prophet plays. God sends prophets to declare His will to mankind. The Proclamation to the World ends with a warning: 'Further, we warn that the disintegration of the family will bring upon individuals, communities, and nations the calamities foretold by ancient and modern prophets. We call upon responsible citizens and officers of government everywhere to promote those measures designed to maintain and strengthen the family as the fundamental unit of society.'
"By fighting to pass Proposition 8, the Church is showing and proving to the world that we are the Church of Jesus Christ and will not allow something 'ordained of God' to be twisted and perverted to whatever society wants."
Unfortunately for me, fortunately for this poor, misinformed student, I had to send a reply with fewer than 250 words. How is this possible?! How can people honestly think that we should allow this to go uncontested?
In Elder Russell M. Nelson's most recent talk in the October 2008 General Conference, he said, concerning marriage, eternal and secular, between a man and a woman, "These truths are absolute. Members of this Church invite all people to learn them and to qualify for eternal life." There you have it. No matter what your opinion is in marriage, we need to keep in mind that there is absolute truth. There is a right answer and there is a wrong answer. There is no gray area in this issue.
Elder Nelson continued, "God’s plan of happiness allows us to choose for ourselves. As with the patterns of the shopper, we may choose celestial marriage or lesser alternatives. Some marital options are cheap, some are costly, and some are cunningly crafted by the adversary. Beware of his options; they always breed misery! The best choice is a celestial marriage. Thankfully, if a lesser choice has previously been made, a choice can now be made to upgrade it to the best choice. That requires a mighty change of heart and a permanent personal upgrade. Blessings so derived are worth all efforts made. The full realization of the blessings of a temple marriage is almost beyond our mortal comprehension. Such a marriage will continue to grow in the celestial realm. There we can become perfected. As Jesus ultimately received the fulness of the glory of the Father, so we may 'come unto the Father . . . and in due time receive of his fulness.'"
Contrary to what this student believes, by avidly fighting against Proposition 8, the Church is not "[hurting] those men and women within the Church who struggle with same-sex attraction", but rather are showing them that there is a better, celestial, true way.
We need to disabuse the public mind and reverse whatever indoctrination has been prevailing so that we can uphold the Lord's institution.
"I am appalled at the number of BYU students campaigning for the California initiative. The onslaught of flyers has left my stomach churning. I wish these students could see how voting for Proposition 8 simply hurts the Church. It hurts those men and women withinn the Church who struggle with same-sex attraction. It hurts our image. It turns people against the Church. Joseph Smith once said he teaches his people correct principles and allows them to govern themselves. We have been taught the correct principle regarding same-sex attraction and acting on those tendencies. Now let's try out a little agency and govern ourselves while allowing others to make their own decisions without government interference."
That made me sick. I couldn't believe that some people, BYU students nonetheless, could believe that we (the Church, actually) should just roll over and allow the world to run its own course without any correction! That is ridiculous! And so, I immediately send a reply letter to the Universe:
"The letter entitled 'Proposition 8' last Friday was from a student declaring that she was 'appalled' at the campaigning of BYU students encouraging California citizens to vote in favor of Proposition 8. She argued that such campaigning, encouraged by the First Presidency mind you, hurts the image of the Church and those that struggle with same-sex attraction. She concluded by saying, 'Let's try out a little agency and govern ourselves while allowing others to make their own decisions without government interference.' I'm continually fascinated and horrified that so many Latter-day Saints do not understand the gravity of this issue and the consequences that will ensue if we '[allow] others to make their own decisions without government interference.'
"Perhaps this student does not understand the role that a prophet plays. God sends prophets to declare His will to mankind. The Proclamation to the World ends with a warning: 'Further, we warn that the disintegration of the family will bring upon individuals, communities, and nations the calamities foretold by ancient and modern prophets. We call upon responsible citizens and officers of government everywhere to promote those measures designed to maintain and strengthen the family as the fundamental unit of society.'
"By fighting to pass Proposition 8, the Church is showing and proving to the world that we are the Church of Jesus Christ and will not allow something 'ordained of God' to be twisted and perverted to whatever society wants."
Unfortunately for me, fortunately for this poor, misinformed student, I had to send a reply with fewer than 250 words. How is this possible?! How can people honestly think that we should allow this to go uncontested?
In Elder Russell M. Nelson's most recent talk in the October 2008 General Conference, he said, concerning marriage, eternal and secular, between a man and a woman, "These truths are absolute. Members of this Church invite all people to learn them and to qualify for eternal life." There you have it. No matter what your opinion is in marriage, we need to keep in mind that there is absolute truth. There is a right answer and there is a wrong answer. There is no gray area in this issue.
Elder Nelson continued, "God’s plan of happiness allows us to choose for ourselves. As with the patterns of the shopper, we may choose celestial marriage or lesser alternatives. Some marital options are cheap, some are costly, and some are cunningly crafted by the adversary. Beware of his options; they always breed misery! The best choice is a celestial marriage. Thankfully, if a lesser choice has previously been made, a choice can now be made to upgrade it to the best choice. That requires a mighty change of heart and a permanent personal upgrade. Blessings so derived are worth all efforts made. The full realization of the blessings of a temple marriage is almost beyond our mortal comprehension. Such a marriage will continue to grow in the celestial realm. There we can become perfected. As Jesus ultimately received the fulness of the glory of the Father, so we may 'come unto the Father . . . and in due time receive of his fulness.'"
Contrary to what this student believes, by avidly fighting against Proposition 8, the Church is not "[hurting] those men and women within the Church who struggle with same-sex attraction", but rather are showing them that there is a better, celestial, true way.
We need to disabuse the public mind and reverse whatever indoctrination has been prevailing so that we can uphold the Lord's institution.
Monday, October 6, 2008
And it's been a while...
Truly it has. And the masses have been literally CLAMORING for me to write another post. Well, rest assured, one is on it's way. Fear not, my flock. The dawn will come. Just endure the dark night a little longer.
The night is always darkest just before the dawn.
The night is always darkest just before the dawn.
Monday, September 15, 2008
Really? Are we really discussing this?
Alright, this clip irked me a little bit. But not for the same reason that it perturbed this attorney.
Like the news reporter said, it's just a late night skit. I don't get why this is even an issue. I don't remember anybody freaking out when Will Ferrell played Janet Reno. I mean, come on, he was a man dressed as a woman. Why are we worried about this Obama skit?
Besides, he's just as white as he is black, right? That's what happens when you get half of your chromosomes from a Caucasian and the other half from an African-American. So, this white person portraying Obama is just as politically correct as if one of SNL's black actors did the impersonation.
And why is the attorney worried about "darkening" the actor? What about requiring an actor to go tanning before they play a role? What about makeup? It's to make it appear as if the actor doesn't look pale in the lights. Isn't that "darkening"? I just don't get the difference.
Seriously, all of this political correctness is getting out of hand.
Like the news reporter said, it's just a late night skit. I don't get why this is even an issue. I don't remember anybody freaking out when Will Ferrell played Janet Reno. I mean, come on, he was a man dressed as a woman. Why are we worried about this Obama skit?
Besides, he's just as white as he is black, right? That's what happens when you get half of your chromosomes from a Caucasian and the other half from an African-American. So, this white person portraying Obama is just as politically correct as if one of SNL's black actors did the impersonation.
And why is the attorney worried about "darkening" the actor? What about requiring an actor to go tanning before they play a role? What about makeup? It's to make it appear as if the actor doesn't look pale in the lights. Isn't that "darkening"? I just don't get the difference.
Seriously, all of this political correctness is getting out of hand.
Rough night.
Last night. Allow me to paint the picture. I've got a lot of homework before classes on Monday. Needed something to keep me up. Just down the road exists a Maverik gas station. Fountain drink. Two months since I last had a Coke. Gotta stay awake to finish. Midnight comes and goes. Buy a nice big 44 oz Coke. It does the job. Staying awake, alert, all is well. Homework gets finished, looks up an article or few on BYU and the Packers. 3:30 rolls around and I'm still bright-eyed and bushy-tailed. Why not try a few games of chess on the computer? I lose. Finally get slightly tired around 4:30. Wake up around 6:30.
Rough night.
Rough night.
Thursday, September 11, 2008
Money cannot buy happiness?
Okay, after my many years of trying to manage my finances, I'm afraid I've bitten off more than I can chew. I just don't think that I'm made for counting beans. I tried accounting once, and had to take it again to repair the damage done. Why is this so difficult for me?
There's a particular account of mine that enjoys heaping on all sorts of fees and I feel as if there's a hole in my pocket out of which money continually falls. It's slipping through my hands like sand.
Sure, money doesn't buy happiness, but it does tend to alleviate a lot of stress, yeah?
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.
Recently, I've been following the blog of a dear friend of mine. I admire his bravery in standing up against people and ideas that challenge his beliefs and life experience. Because of the sensitive subjects discussed, I imagine that many people frequent his blog, and there are the usuals that reply to his posts. However, there has been a person/persons that have felt it necessary to reply anonymously, as blogger.com obviously allows. It is the notion of anonymous posting that I would like to discuss.For many reasons, someone may feel the urge to post anonymously. For one, Anonymous may be a close relative/friend/acquaintance to the blogger. He or she would read the blogger's post and feel as if he or she must reply negatively (considering the vast majority of anonymous posts connote an unfriendly tone). Naturally, opposing a relative/friend/acquaintance's ideas would be destructive to the relationship! Right? The last thing Anonymous wants is to be found out for who he or she really is.
I think this concept transfers over to chat rooms and/or pornography in a way. Anonymous feels the need to post/chat/watch in order to gratify themselves, but entirely escaping all accountability in the process. Indeed, as my friend mentioned, it is cowardly. For what would happen if Anonymous were caught posting/chatting/watching?
Without a doubt, anonymous posting is cowardice and a desperate plea to gratify one's pride and escaping any accountability and repercussion which may (or may not) follow.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
