Not an Endorsement of Any Political Candidate

If Mitt Romney becomes President of the United States, will President Monson become an official spiritual advisor?  This question, at first glance, seems simple.  But the more I think about it, the more complicated it gets.  Here are some things I’ve been thinking about since this question was posed:

The LDS church has been very clear about its political neutrality.  It does not endorse any political party, nor does it reject any political party currently in the USA (I suspect it would decry a political party bent on annihilation of a race of people, but I don’t know that).  The church officially encourages its members to participate in local politics, taking advantage of all opportunities to be heard, including local caucuses, voting, and writing to legislators.  Both the Democrats and the Republicans, according to the LDS church leadership, have good and bad policies, good and bad politicians.  Members are encouraged to prayerfully choose candidates that will do the most good for the community and country.

            Does prayer help in deciding for whom to vote?  I believe that God loves His children as much today as He did in the time of the Old Testament.  He has not abandoned His children to muddle through as best they can.  Revelation can and does continue on Earth today.  Prayers are answered regularly and clearly, even with answers as specific as how to vote in local elections. 

            Revelation is given to those for whom it is relevant.  I will not, for example, be given revelation about how my friend should raise her children.  That is not my jurisdiction, and not my business.  Each person gets revelation that is relevant and important to his or her own life and responsibilities.  Sometimes the answer may be, “It doesn’t matter.  Either choice would be fine.”  Sometimes the Lord has specific direction for a particular situation.

            Based on these beliefs, I think the real spiritual advisor to Mitt Romney, should he become President of the United States, would be God Himself.  It is not President Monson’s responsibility to govern the country.  He has other responsibilities.  But the US President is certainly entitled to revelation pertaining to his job, as is anyone else.

            I believe this is true no matter who is in office.  Any sincere prayer, accompanied by real faith in the power of God to reveal His will, is answered.  The trick is having that real faith, truly believing the answer will come, and then recognizing the answer when it does come.  A person of faith, willing to ask for and accept the guidance of the Lord, may be the best choice for any political office or other position of leadership.  

Chocolate vs. Shoes

Chocolate or Shoes?

Chocolate Pros: best cure for fear (see Harry Potter); good cure for bad days, too; dark is good for your health; easy to grab a candy bar when time is at a premium; Cadbury crème eggs; can be covered in candy so it won’t melt in your hands; don’t have to share it with the dogs; excellent source of cocoa, one of the major food groups; Ghiradelli dark chocolate/raspberry squares.

Chocolate Cons: so hard to stop at the one square that’s actually beneficial to health; calories, calories, calories; the truly good stuff is hard to find; children can sniff out the stash no matter where you hide it; melts in warm environments; even though cocoa comes from a plant, chocolate does not count as a vegetable.

Shoe Pros: happy feet make happy hearts; really fabulous heels inspire confidence; shoe size stays the same no matter how much weight you lose or gain; come in all colors; many styles to choose from; never need ironing; great shoes completely transform a simple jeans/sweater outfit; excellent result of retail therapy.

Shoe Cons: high heels and ballet flats are equally bad for feet; hard to store in large numbers; need to be repaired or replaced alarmingly often; a good fit is hard to find.

Verdict: Obviously chocolate shoes are not the answer.  You can’t wear something that melts, and you can’t eat something that’s been on your feet.  Choosing one or the other is impossible.  One must have both in order to be truly happy.  Luckily, shoe stores are often in malls, where one can also find Mrs. Field’s chocolate chip cookies, Rocky Mountain Chocolate Factory fudge, and See’s which gives free samples.  Happy shopping!

Curing "D"eafness and Curing "d"eafness

I have never been deaf—my hearing is reasonably good (although I can’t hear the phone through my right ear, that’s easy enough to compensate for).  I, like most hearing people, was unaware there was a culture associated with  American Sign Language until I started studying the language under non-hearing professors.  Some aspects of this culture are completely foreign to me, even annoying.  For example, why can’t anything EVER start or end on time?  Other things, while different, seem charming.  Friends are greeted with warm hugs, for example.  As I learn the language, I feel more and more comfortable mingling in this unique culture.  This gives me a perspective on this culture unshared by many, neither hearing people who aren’t aware of its existence, nor non-hearing who grew up immersed in it.

A friend asked me if there should be a cure for Deafness, and I had to think about it.  There are two questions here, and I’m not sure even my friend recognized the second, hidden question.

Should there be a cure for deafness?  Well, obviously there should.  It would be lovely if we could cure age-related deafness.  Grandparents should revel in the laughter of their beloved grandchildren.  People who have always found joy in music should not lose that in old age.  We should applaud efforts to cure deafness in late-deafened teens and adults, who grew up hearing and lost that sense due to accident or illness.  In a world where the technology is available, if infant and imperfect, to correct this type of hearing loss, it is silly to expect people to begin again, learning a visual language after serious illness or in extreme old age.  That’s the second question.

The first question, and the one I believe my friend meant to ask, is whether there should be a cure for Deafness.  The capital “D” indicates a cultural affiliation.  In some ways, it’s like asking if there should be a cure for Italian-ness or BibleBeltNess.  No one needs to be cured of their cultural identity.  Differences should be celebrated and embraced, cultures shared and communication facilitated by mutual good humor and patience.

There is technology available now that can offer a semblance of hearing, if it works, and if the patient is willing to do the work to learn to use it.  It is by no means perfect, nor does it work in all cases.  The viral video everyone saw of a woman hearing her children’s voices for the first time was staged—it doesn’t actually work that way.  This technology, called a cochlear implant, is the first prosthetic device that replaces one of the human senses. 

I will probably offend all of my Deaf friends and most of my hearing friends when I say this research should be continued, and this technology should be improved, and should be used.  Until it is closer to perfect, I do not believe children should be implanted unless the child has no residual hearing at all, in either ear, and perhaps also has poor vision. 

Should there be a cure for deafness?  My answer is a resounding, “Yes.”  Should there be a cure for Deafness?  My answer is a qualified, “Maybe.” 

Guest Blogger: Marcus

 Marcus wrote this in 2008.  It's still funny, and relevant, today.

Your cash is gone

Your grades have bombed

Can’t trim your nails nor mow your lawn

Your eyes are red

You look half dead

Never remember what you said

Seem hella old

Can’t breathe in cold

Holy crap, Kid, you smell like mold

Get beat by thugs

Food tastes like bugs

So next time just say no to drugs